Literature DB >> 28025587

Panel Conditioning in the General Social Survey.

Andrew Halpern-Manners1, John Robert Warren2, Florencia Torche3.   

Abstract

Does participation in one wave of a survey have an effect on respondents' answers to questions in subsequent waves? In this article, we investigate the presence and magnitude of "panel conditioning" effects in one of the most frequently used data sets in the social sciences: the General Social Survey (GSS). Using longitudinal records from the 2006, 2008, and 2010 surveys, we find evidence that at least some GSS items suffer from this form of bias. To rule out the possibility of contamination due to selective attrition and/or unobserved heterogeneity, we strategically exploit a series of between-person comparisons across time-in-survey groups. This methodology, which can be implemented whenever researchers have access to at least three waves of rotating panel data, is described in some detail so as to facilitate future applications in data sets with similar design elements.

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 28025587      PMCID: PMC5181853          DOI: 10.1177/0049124114532445

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sociol Methods Res        ISSN: 0049-1241


  7 in total

1.  How to interpret a genome-wide association study.

Authors:  Thomas A Pearson; Teri A Manolio
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 2.  Sensitive questions in surveys.

Authors:  Roger Tourangeau; Ting Yan
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  Being surveyed can change later behavior and related parameter estimates.

Authors:  Alix Peterson Zwane; Jonathan Zinman; Eric Van Dusen; William Pariente; Clair Null; Edward Miguel; Michael Kremer; Dean S Karlan; Richard Hornbeck; Xavier Giné; Esther Duflo; Florencia Devoto; Bruno Crepon; Abhijit Banerjee
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Panel conditioning in longitudinal studies: evidence from labor force items in the Current Population Survey.

Authors:  Andrew Halpern-Manners; John Robert Warren
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2012-11

5.  Social desirability bias in diary panels is evident in panelists' behavioral frequency.

Authors:  Rex S Toh; Eunkyu Lee; Michael Y Hu
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  2006-10

6.  Survey conditioning in self-reported mental health service use: randomized comparison of alternative instrument formats.

Authors:  Naihua Duan; Margarita Alegria; Glorisa Canino; Thomas G McGuire; David Takeuchi
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Asking questions changes behavior: mere measurement effects on frequency of blood donation.

Authors:  Gaston Godin; Paschal Sheeran; Mark Conner; Marc Germain
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.267

  7 in total
  3 in total

1.  Data Collection as Disruption: Insights from a Longitudinal Study of Young Adulthood.

Authors:  Jeong Hyun Oh; Sara Yeatman; Jenny Trinitapoli
Journal:  Am Sociol Rev       Date:  2019-07-09

2.  The Prevalence of Cognitive Impairment Is Not Increasing in the United States: A Critique of Hale et al. (2020).

Authors:  Mark Lee; Andrew Halpern-Manners; John Robert Warren
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 4.860

3.  Forgotten marriages? Measuring the reliability of marriage histories.

Authors:  Sophia Chae
Journal:  Demogr Res       Date:  2014-01-16
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.