IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucn/wpaper/200808.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Validating the Use of Vignettes for Subjective Threshold Scales

Author

Listed:
  • Liam Delaney

    (University College of Dublin)

  • Colm Harmon

    (University College of Dublin)

  • Arie Kapteyn

    (RAND Corporation)

  • Arthur Van Soest

    (Tilburg University)

  • James P Smith

    (RAND Corporation)

Abstract

Comparing self-assessed indicators of subjective outcomes such as health, work disability, political efficacy, job satisfaction, etc. across countries or socio-economic groups is often hampered by the fact that different groups use systematically different response scales. Anchoring vignettes have been introduced as an effective tool to correct for such differences. This paper develops an integrated framework in which objective measurements are used to validate the vignette based corrections. The framework is applied to vignettes and objective and subjective self-assessments of drinking behavior by students in Ireland. Model comparisons using the Akaike information criterion favor a specification with response consistency and vignette corrected response scales. Put differently, vignette based corrections appear quite effective in bringing objective and subjective measures closer together.

Suggested Citation

  • Liam Delaney & Colm Harmon & Arie Kapteyn & Arthur Van Soest & James P Smith, 2008. "Validating the Use of Vignettes for Subjective Threshold Scales," Working Papers 200808, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucn:wpaper:200808
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ucd.ie/economics/research/papers/2008/WP08.08.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2008
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:apsrev:v:98:y:2004:i:01:p:191-207_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur van Soest, 2007. "Vignettes and Self-Reports of Work Disability in the United States and the Netherlands," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 461-473, March.
    3. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell, 2008. "Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health disparities?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 351-375, March.
    4. Lindeboom, Maarten & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2004. "Cut-point shift and index shift in self-reported health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1083-1099, November.
    5. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur VanSoest, 2005. "Vignettes and Self Reported Work Disability," Labor and Demography 0511005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur Van Soest, 2004. "Self-reported Work Disability in the US and The Netherlands," Working Papers WR-206, RAND Corporation.
    7. Kristensen, Nicolai & Johansson, Edvard, 2008. "New evidence on cross-country differences in job satisfaction using anchoring vignettes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 96-117, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fontaine, Xavier & Haywood, Luke, 2018. "On the comparison of group inequalities using subjective data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 17-21.
    2. Johnston, David W. & Propper, Carol & Shields, Michael A., 2009. "Comparing subjective and objective measures of health: Evidence from hypertension for the income/health gradient," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 540-552, May.
    3. Nigel Rice & Silvana Robone & Peter C. Smith, 2012. "Vignettes and health systems responsiveness in cross‐country comparative analyses," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 175(2), pages 337-369, April.
    4. Laura Rossouw & Teresa Bago d’Uva & Eddy Doorslaer, 2018. "Poor Health Reporting? Using Anchoring Vignettes to Uncover Health Disparities by Wealth and Race," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1935-1956, October.
    5. William H. Greene & Mark N. Harris & Rachel J. Knott & Nigel Rice, 2021. "Specification and testing of hierarchical ordered response models with anchoring vignettes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 31-64, January.
    6. Renske Kok & Mauricio Avendano & Teresa Bago d’Uva & Johan Mackenbach, 2012. "Can Reporting Heterogeneity Explain Differences in Depressive Symptoms Across Europe?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 191-210, January.
    7. Knott, R. & Lorgelly, P. & Black, N. & Hollingsworth, B., 2016. "Differential item functioning in the EQ-5D: An exploratory analysis using anchoring vignettes," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 16/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    8. Kapteyn, Arie & Wah, Saw Htay, 2016. "Challenges to small and medium-size businesses in Myanmar: What are they and how do we know?," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-22.
    9. Datta Gupta, Nabanita & Kristensen, Nicolai & Pozzoli, Dario, 2010. "External validation of the use of vignettes in cross-country health studies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 854-865, July.
    10. Jorge E. Araña & Carmelo J. León, 2012. "Scale-perception bias in the valuation of environmental risks," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(20), pages 2607-2617, July.
    11. Hendrik Jürges & Arthur Soest, 2012. "Comparing the Well-Being of Older Europeans: Introduction," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 187-190, January.
    12. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell, 2008. "Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health disparities?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 351-375, March.
    13. Franco Peracchi & Claudio Rossetti, 2013. "The heterogeneous thresholds ordered response model: identification and inference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(3), pages 703-722, June.
    14. Raskina, Yulia & Podkorytova, Olga & Kuchakov, Ruslan, 2022. "Health determinants and the reporting heterogeneity bias in Russia: Anchoring vignettes approach," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 66, pages 118-143.
    15. Bertoni, Marco, 2015. "Hungry today, unhappy tomorrow? Childhood hunger and subjective wellbeing later in life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 40-53.
    16. Teresa Bago d’Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O’Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2011. "Slipping Anchor?: Testing the Vignettes Approach to Identification and Correction of Reporting Heterogeneity," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 46(4), pages 875-906.
    17. Eric Bonsang & Arthur Soest, 2012. "Satisfaction with Social Contacts of Older Europeans," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 273-292, January.
    18. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur Van Soest & Hana Vonkova, 2011. "Anchoring Vignettes and Response Consistency," Working Papers WR-840, RAND Corporation.
    19. Zhang, Hao & Bago d’Uva, Teresa & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2015. "The gender health gap in China: A decomposition analysis," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 13-26.
    20. Franco Peracchi & Claudio Rossetti, 2009. "Gender and regional differences in self-rated health in Europe," CEIS Research Paper 142, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 30 Sep 2009.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    anchoring vignettes; reporting bias; hopit model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior

    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:ucn:wpaper:200808. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nicolas Clifton (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/educdie.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.