IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/19539.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring the Accuracy of Survey Responses using Administrative Register Data: Evidence from Denmark

Author

Listed:
  • Claus Thustrup Kreiner
  • David Dreyer Lassen
  • Søren Leth-Petersen

Abstract

This paper shows how Danish administrative register data can be combined with survey data at the person level and be used to validate information collected in the survey. Register data are collected by automatic third party reporting and the potential errors associated with the two data sources are therefore plausibly orthogonal. Two examples are given to illustrate the potential of combining survey and register data. In the first example expenditure survey records with information about total expenditure are merged with income tax records holding information about income and wealth. Income and wealth data are used to impute total expenditure which is then compared to the survey measure. Results suggest that the two measures match each other well on average. In the second example we compare responses to a one-shot recall question about total gross personal income (collected in another survey) with tax records. Tax records hold detailed information about different types of income and this makes it possible to test if errors in the survey response are related to the reporting of particular types of income. Results show bias in the mean and that the survey error has substantial variance. Results also show that the errors are correlated with conventional covariates suggesting that the errors are not of the classical type. The latter example illustrates how Denmark can be used as a "laboratory" for future validation studies. Tax records with detailed information about different types of income are available for the entire Danish population and can be readily merged to survey data. This makes it possible to test the ability of respondents to accurately report different types of income using different interviewing techniques and questions. The examples presented in this paper are based on cross section data. However, the possibility to issue surveys repeatedly to the same persons and linking up to longitudinal tax records provides an opportunity to learn more about the time series properties of measurement errors, a subject about which little evidence exist, in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Claus Thustrup Kreiner & David Dreyer Lassen & Søren Leth-Petersen, 2013. "Measuring the Accuracy of Survey Responses using Administrative Register Data: Evidence from Denmark," NBER Working Papers 19539, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:19539
    Note: LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w19539.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wojciech Kopczuk & Emmanuel Saez & Jae Song, 2010. "Earnings Inequality and Mobility in the United States: Evidence from Social Security Data Since 1937," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(1), pages 91-128.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kolsrud, Jonas & Landais, Camille & Spinnewijn, Johannes, 2017. "Studying Consumption Patterns using Registry Data: Lessons From Swedish Administrative Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 12402, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Randall K. Filer & Jan Hanousek & Tomáš Lichard & Karine Torosyan, 2019. "‘Flattening’ tax evasion? : Evidence from the post‐communist natural experiment," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 27(1), pages 223-246, January.
    3. Fagereng, Andreas & Halvorsen, Elin, 2017. "Imputing consumption from Norwegian income and wealth registry data," Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, IOS Press, issue 1, pages 67-100.
    4. Tomas Lichard & Jan Hanousek & Randall K. Filer, 2012. "Measuring the Shadow Economy: Endogenous Switching Regression with Unobserved Separation," Economics Working Paper Archive at Hunter College 438, Hunter College Department of Economics.
    5. Yvonne McCarthy & Kieran McQuinn, 2016. "Attenuation Bias, Recall Error and the Housing Wealth Effect," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(3), pages 492-517, August.
    6. Stefan Angel & Richard Heuberger & Nadja Lamei, 2018. "Differences Between Household Income from Surveys and Registers and How These Affect the Poverty Headcount: Evidence from the Austrian SILC," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(2), pages 575-603, July.
    7. Francesco D’Acunto & Daniel Hoang & Michael Weber, 2020. "Managing Households' Expectations with Unconventional Policies," NBER Working Papers 27399, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Christopher D. Carroll, 2014. "Representing Consumption and Saving without a Representative Consumer," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring Economic Sustainability and Progress, pages 115-134, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Søren Leth-Petersen & Peer Ebbesen Skov, 2014. "Does the marginal tax rate affect activity in the informal sector?," Study Papers 64, Rockwool Foundation Research Unit.
    10. Cabral, Ana Cinta G. & Gemmell, Norman, 2018. "Estimating Self-Employment Income-Gaps from Register and Survey Data: Evidence for New Zealand," Working Paper Series 7625, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:19539. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.