Item Non-Response and Imputation of Annual Labor Income in Panel Surveys from a Cross-National Perspective
35 Pages Posted: 12 Oct 2007
Date Written: September 2007
Abstract
Using data on annual individual labor income from three representative panel datasets (German SOEP, British BHPS, Australian HILDA) we investigate a) the selectivity of item non-response (INR) and b) the impact of imputation as a prominent post-survey means to cope with this type of measurement error on prototypical analyses (earnings inequality, mobility and wage regressions) in a cross-national setting. Given the considerable variation of INR across surveys as well as the varying degree of selectivity build into the missing process, there is substantive and methodological interest in an improved harmonization of (income) data production as well as of imputation strategies across surveys. All three panels make use of longitudinal information in their respective imputation procedures, however, there are marked differences in the implementation. Firstly, although the probability of INR is quantitatively similar across countries, our empirical investigation identifies cross-country differences with respect to the factors driving INR: survey-related aspects as well as indicators accounting for variability and complexity of labor income composition appear to be relevant. Secondly, longitudinal analyses yield a positive correlation of INR on labor income data over time and provide evidence of INR being a predictor of subsequent unit-non-response, thus supporting the "cooperation continuum" hypothesis in all three panels. Thirdly, applying various mobility indicators there is a robust picture about earnings mobility being significantly understated using information from completely observed cases only. Finally, regression results for wage equations based on observed ("complete case analysis") vs. all cases and controlling for imputation status, indicate that individuals with imputed incomes, ceteris paribus, earn significantly above average in SOEP and HILDA, while this relationship is negative using BHPS data. However, once applying the very same imputation procedure used for HILDA and SOEP, namely the "row-and-column-imputation" approach suggested by Little & Su (1989), also to BHPS-data, this result is reversed, i.e., individuals in the BHPS whose income has been imputed earn above average as well. In our view, the reduction in cross-national variation resulting from sensitivity to the choice of imputation approaches underscores the importance of investing more in the improved cross-national harmonization of imputation techniques.
Keywords: item non-response, imputation, income inequality, income mobility, panel data, SOEP, BHPS, HILDA
JEL Classification: J31, C81, D33
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
The Level and Distribution of Global Household Wealth
By James B. Davies, Susanna Sandström, ...
-
Does Limited Access to Mortgage Debt Explain Why Young Adults Live with Their Parents?
-
Comparing Wealth Distribution Across Rich Countries: First Results from the Luxembourg Wealth Study
By Eva Sierminska, Andrea Brandolini, ...
-
Comparing Wealth Distribution across Rich Countries: First Results from the Luxembourg Wealth Study
-
Comparing Wealth Distribution Across Rich Countries: First Results from the Luxembourg Wealth Study
-
The Spanish Survey of Household Finances (EFF): Description and Methods of the 2005 Wave
-
Franco Modigliani and the Life Cycle Theory of Consumption
By Angus Deaton
-
By Joachim R. Frick, Markus Grabka, ...
-
Inequality of the Distribution of Personal Wealth in Germany 1973-1998
By Holger Stein and Richard Hauser