Survey response and survey characteristics: microlevel evidence from the European Community Household Panel
By C. Nicoletti, Franco Peracchi. 2005
137 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/15c60b053651d6f98fe03f13cf37c4b00cff5618
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Sociology and Political Science
- M. Wooden
- Kristen Olson
- P. Lugtig
- Frauke Kreuter
- Robert M. Sauer
- D. Kneale
- N. Watson
- Andrew M. Jones
In Statistics and Probability
- Kristen Olson
- P. Lugtig
- Frauke Kreuter
- J. Wagner
- Andrew M. Jones
- Daniela Del Boca
- Ting Yan
- Robert M. Sauer
Citations in the corpus
- Life Cycle Employment and Fertility Across Institutional Environments (2009, background): “The restriction that all women have complete employment and fertility histories excludes women in the ECHP who could not be contacted or refused to cooperate subsequent to being interviewed in wave 1, as well as women who entered the survey after wave 1 (see Nicoletti and Peracchi, 2004).”
- Health‐related non‐response in the British Household Panel Survey and European Community Household Panel: using inverse‐probability‐weighted estimators in non‐linear models (2006, methodology): “To borrow the taxonomy of reasons for non-participation that were used by Nicoletti and Peracchi (2005), non-response can arise from (a) demographic events such as death, (b) movement out of the scope of the survey such as institutionalization or emigration, (c) refusal to respond at subsequent…”
- Postponement and childlessness - Evidence from two British cohorts (2008, background): “Cohort members who attrit from studies are thought to differ systematically from those who continue to participate (Young et al. 2006; Niccoletti and Peracchi 2005), and studies are more likely to lose men and those of low socioeconomic status.”
- Attrition in Panel Data: The Effectiveness of Weighting (2006, unknown): “Research by Nicoletti and Peracchi (2005) has shown that good predictors of the probability of contact in the ECHP are number of children, home ownership, length of residence at current address, an index of item nonresponse to household income, length of the fieldwork and duration of the interview…”
- Identifying Factors Affecting Longitudinal Survey Response (2009, methodology): “First, a Wald test suggests that the assumption of conditional independence should be rejected (ρ = .356; chi-squared = 7.47; p-value = 0.006), but like Nicoletti and Peracchi (2005) we find that the estimated coefficients are little different when the conditional independence assumption is relaxed.”
- Panel Attrition (2014, background): “While analyzing the determinants or consequences of attrition, some authors pool all wave-on-wave attrition patterns (Nicoletti and Peracchi 2005; Watson and Wooden 2009), and simply discern two groups: the attriters and stayers.”
- Using proxy measures and other correlates of survey outcomes to adjust for non‐response: examples from multiple surveys (2010, background): “In the past, attention was often focused on finding variables that are associated with response although small R2-statistics are very common in response propensity models (Janson, 2003; Nicoletti and Peracchi, 2005; Feskens et al., 2007).”