Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/naz/wpaper/1702.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rescaled Additivity Non-Ignorable (RAN) Model of Generalized Attrition

Author

Listed:
  • Emre Ekinci

    (Department of Business Administration, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)

  • Insan Tunah

    (Department of Economics, Koc University)

  • Berk Yavuzoglu

    (Department of Economics, Nazarbayev University)

Abstract
We augment the Additively Non-ignorable (AN) model of Hirano et. al. (2001) so that it is suitable for data collection efforts that have a short panel component. Our modification yields a convenient semi-parametric bias correction framework for handling selective non-response that can emerge when multiple visits to the same unit are planned. Selective non-response can be due to attrition, when initial response is followed by nonresponse (the commonly studied case), as well as a phenomenon we term reverse attrition, when initial nonresponse is followed by response. Accounting for reverse attrition creates an additional identification problem, which we circumvent by rescaling. We apply our methodology to data from the Household Labor Force Survey (HLFS) in Turkey, which shares a key design feature (namely a rotating sample frame) with popular surveys such as the Current Population Survey and the European Union Labor Force Survey. The correction amounts to adjusting the observed joint distribution over the state space (inactive, employed, unemployed in our example) using reflation factors expressed as parametric functions of the states occupied in the initial and subsequent rounds. Our method produces a unique set of corrected joint probabilities that are consistent with externally obtained marginal distributions (in our case published official statistics). The linear additive version has a closed form solution, a feature which renders our method computationally attractive. Our empirical results show that selective attrition/reverse attrition in HLFS-Turkey is a statistically and substantially important concern.

Suggested Citation

  • Emre Ekinci & Insan Tunah & Berk Yavuzoglu, 2017. "Rescaled Additivity Non-Ignorable (RAN) Model of Generalized Attrition," Working Papers 1702, Nazarbayev University, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    • Handle: RePEc:naz:wpaper:1702
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shss.nu.edu.kz/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Econ_NU_WP_1702.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ridder, Geert & Moffitt, Robert, 2007. "The Econometrics of Data Combination," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 75, Elsevier.
    2. Heng Chen & Marie-Hélène Felt & Kim P. Huynh, 2017. "Retail payment innovations and cash usage: accounting for attrition by using refreshment samples," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 503-530, February.
    3. Ridder, Geert, 1992. "An empirical evaluation of some models for non-random attrition in panel data," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 337-355, December.
    4. Bhattacharya, Debopam, 2008. "Inference in panel data models under attrition caused by unobservables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 430-446, June.
    5. Emre Ekinci, 2009. "Dealing with Attrition When Refreshment Samples are Available: An Application to the Turkish Household Labor Force Survey," 2009 Meeting Papers 353, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder & Donald B. Rubin, 2001. "Combining Panel Data Sets with Attrition and Refreshment Samples," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1645-1659, November.
    7. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1979. "Attrition Bias in Experimental and Panel Data: The Gary Income Maintenance Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 455-473, March.
    8. Abowd, John M & Zellner, Arnold, 1985. "Estimating Gross Labor-Force Flows," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 3(3), pages 254-283, June.
    9. Nevo, Aviv, 2003. "Using Weights to Adjust for Sample Selection When Auxiliary Information Is Available," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 43-52, January.
    10. Golan, Amos & Judge, George & Robinson, Sherman, 1994. "Recovering Information from Incomplete or Partial Multisectoral Economic Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(3), pages 541-549, August.
    11. Stasny, Elizabeth A, 1988. "Modeling Nonignorable Nonresponse in Categorical Panel Data with an Example in Estimating Gross Labor-Force Flows," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(2), pages 207-219, April.
    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. Heng Chen & Marie-Hélène Felt & Kim P. Huynh, 2017. "Retail payment innovations and cash usage: accounting for attrition by using refreshment samples," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 503-530, February.
    2. Harding, Matthew & Lamarche, Carlos, 2019. "A panel quantile approach to attrition bias in Big Data: Evidence from a randomized experiment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 61-82.
    3. Marcel Das & Vera Toepoel & Arthur van Soest, 2011. "Nonparametric Tests of Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(1), pages 32-56, February.
    4. Insan Tunali & Emre Ekinci & Berk Yavuzoglu, 2012. "Rescaled Additively Non-ignorable (RAN) Model of Attrition and Substitution," Koç University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum Working Papers 1220, Koc University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum.
    5. Bhattacharya, Debopam, 2008. "Inference in panel data models under attrition caused by unobservables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 430-446, June.
    6. Xavier d'Haultfoeuille & Stefan Hoderlein & Yuya Sasaki, 2013. "Nonlinear difference-in-differences in repeated cross sections with continuous treatments," CeMMAP working papers CWP40/13, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    7. Yamana Kazufumi, 2020. "Monte Carlo Evidence on the Estimation Method for Industry Dynamics," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, January.
    8. Sasaki, Yuya, 2015. "Heterogeneity and selection in dynamic panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 236-249.
    9. Takahiro Hoshino & Keisuke Takahata, 2018. "Identification of heterogeneous treatment effects as a function of potential untreated outcome under the nonignorable assignment condition," Keio-IES Discussion Paper Series 2018-005, Institute for Economics Studies, Keio University.
    10. Emre Ekinci, 2009. "Dealing with Attrition When Refreshment Samples are Available: An Application to the Turkish Household Labor Force Survey," 2009 Meeting Papers 353, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    11. Rene Segers & Philip Hans Franses, 2014. "Panel design effects on response rates and response quality," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 68(1), pages 1-24, February.
    12. Terence C. Cheng & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2015. "Attrition Bias in Panel Data: A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing? A Case Study Based on the Mabel Survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1101-1117, September.
    13. John Fitzgerald & Peter Gottschalk & Robert Moffitt, 1998. "An Analysis of Sample Attrition in Panel Data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 251-299.
    14. Joachim Inkmann, 2010. "Estimating Firm Size Elasticities of Product and Process R&D," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 77(306), pages 384-402, April.
    15. Nail Kashaev, 2022. "Estimation of Parametric Binary Outcome Models with Degenerate Pure Choice-Based Data with Application to COVID-19-Positive Tests from British Columbia," University of Western Ontario, Departmental Research Report Series 20225, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
    16. Devereux, Paul J. & Tripathi, Gautam, 2009. "Optimally combining censored and uncensored datasets," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 151(1), pages 17-32, July.
    17. Nevo, Aviv, 2003. "Using Weights to Adjust for Sample Selection When Auxiliary Information Is Available," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 43-52, January.
    18. Richard Dorsett, 2004. "Using matched substitutes to adjust for nonignorable nonresponse: an empirical investigation using labour market data," PSI Research Discussion Series 16, Policy Studies Institute, UK.
    19. Christophe Bell'ego & David Benatia & Vincent Dortet-Bernardet, 2023. "The Chained Difference-in-Differences," Papers 2301.01085, arXiv.org, revised May 2024.
    20. Seik Kim, "undated". "Sample Attrition in the Presence of Population Attrition," Working Papers UWEC-2009-02, University of Washington, Department of Economics.

    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:naz:wpaper:1702. 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: In Kim (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/econukz.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.