How Survey Design Affects Inference Regarding Health Perceptions and Outcomes
This paper considers the role of survey design and question phrasing in evaluating the subjective health assessment responses using the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) dataset. A unique feature of this dataset is that respondents were twice asked during the survey to evaluate their health on a five-point scale, using two different sets of descriptors to define the five points, with the ordering of which set was first given determined randomly. We find no evidence to refute the assertion that the order was determined by random assignment. Yet we document differences in the response distributions between the two questions, as well as differences in inference in comparing the two populations (those that were asked one question first versus those that were asked the other). We then consider determinants of the degree of concordance between the two questions, as well as the determinants of individuals that provide conflicting responses. There appears to be evidence to suggest that individuals' assessments of their health in response to the second question may be influenced by the battery of health questions that were asked following the first assessment. We find that information in self-assessed health responses is useful in examining health outcomes. Our results suggest that adjusting such responses to take into account framing and sequencing of questions may improve inference. In addition, we show that accounting for survey design may be important in models for predicting outcomes of interest, such as the probability of a major health event.
|Date of creation:||Jul 2011|
|Publication status:||published as "How Survey Design Affects Self-Assessed Health Responses in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE)," European Economic Review, 63, pp. 299-307, 2013[with Anneke Exterkate].|
|Note:||AG HC HE|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.|
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Cristina Hernández-Quevedo & Andrew M Jones & Nigel Rice, 2005.
"Reporting bias and heterogeneity in selfassessed health. Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey,"
Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers
05/04, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
- Cristina Hernandez-Quevedo & Andrew M Jones & Nigel Rice, "undated". "Reporting Bias and Heterogeneity in Self-Assessed Health. Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey," Discussion Papers 04/18, Department of Economics, University of York.
- Moum, Torbjoârn, 1992. "Self-assessed health among Norwegian adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 935-947, October.
- Erik Meijer & Arie Kapteyn & Tatiana Andreyeva, 2008.
"Health Indexes and Retirement Modeling in International Comparisons,"
614, RAND Corporation.
- Agar Brugiavini & Tullio Jappelli & Guglielmo Weber, 2002. "The Survey on Health, Aging and Wealth," CSEF Working Papers 86, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
- Crossley, Thomas F. & Kennedy, Steven, 2002. "The reliability of self-assessed health status," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 643-658, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:17244. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.