Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey

Andrew Halpern-Manners; John Robert Warren

doi:10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x

Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey

Andrew Halpern-Manners, John Robert Warren

Sociology (Twin Cities)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

32 Scopus citations

Abstract

Does participating in a longitudinal survey affect respondents' answers to subsequent questions about their labor force characteristics? In this article, we investigate the magnitude of panel conditioning or time-in-survey biases for key labor force questions in the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS). Using linked CPS records for household heads first interviewed between January 2007 and June 2010, our analyses are based on strategic within-person comparisons across survey months and between-person comparisons across CPS rotation groups. We find considerable evidence for panel conditioning effects in the CPS. Panel conditioning downwardly biases the CPS-based unemployment rate, mainly by leading people to remove themselves from its denominator. Across surveys, CPS respondents (claim to) leave the labor force in greater numbers than otherwise equivalent respondents who are participating in the CPS for the first time. The results cannot be attributed to panel attrition or mode effects. We discuss implications for CPS-based research and policy as well as for survey methodology more broadly.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1499-1519
Number of pages	21
Journal	Demography
Volume	49
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x
State	Published - Nov 2012

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Order of authorship is alphabetical to reflect equal contributions by the authors. This article was inspired by a conversation with Michael Hout, and was originally prepared for presentation at the April 2010 annual meetings of the Population Association of America. The National Science Foundation (SES-0647710) and the University of Minnesota’s Life Course Center, Department of Sociology, College of Liberal Arts, and Minnesota Population Center have provided support for this project. We warmly thank Eric Grodsky, Ross Macmillan, Gregory Weyland, anonymous reviewers, and workshop participants at the University of Minnesota, the University of Texas, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and New York University for their constructive criticism and comments. Finally, we thank Anne Polivka, Dorinda Allard, and Steve Miller at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for their helpful feedback. However, all errors or omissions are the authors’ responsibility.

Keywords

Labor force
Panel conditioning
Survey research methods

Publisher link

10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{9dd87824195f40b9b739f20c42229a4a,

title = "Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey",

abstract = "Does participating in a longitudinal survey affect respondents' answers to subsequent questions about their labor force characteristics? In this article, we investigate the magnitude of panel conditioning or time-in-survey biases for key labor force questions in the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS). Using linked CPS records for household heads first interviewed between January 2007 and June 2010, our analyses are based on strategic within-person comparisons across survey months and between-person comparisons across CPS rotation groups. We find considerable evidence for panel conditioning effects in the CPS. Panel conditioning downwardly biases the CPS-based unemployment rate, mainly by leading people to remove themselves from its denominator. Across surveys, CPS respondents (claim to) leave the labor force in greater numbers than otherwise equivalent respondents who are participating in the CPS for the first time. The results cannot be attributed to panel attrition or mode effects. We discuss implications for CPS-based research and policy as well as for survey methodology more broadly.",

keywords = "Labor force, Panel conditioning, Survey research methods",

author = "Andrew Halpern-Manners and Warren, {John Robert}",

note = "Funding Information: Order of authorship is alphabetical to reflect equal contributions by the authors. This article was inspired by a conversation with Michael Hout, and was originally prepared for presentation at the April 2010 annual meetings of the Population Association of America. The National Science Foundation (SES-0647710) and the University of Minnesota{\textquoteright}s Life Course Center, Department of Sociology, College of Liberal Arts, and Minnesota Population Center have provided support for this project. We warmly thank Eric Grodsky, Ross Macmillan, Gregory Weyland, anonymous reviewers, and workshop participants at the University of Minnesota, the University of Texas, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and New York University for their constructive criticism and comments. Finally, we thank Anne Polivka, Dorinda Allard, and Steve Miller at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for their helpful feedback. However, all errors or omissions are the authors{\textquoteright} responsibility. ",

year = "2012",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "49",

pages = "1499--1519",

journal = "Demography",

issn = "0070-3370",

publisher = "Springer New York",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies

T2 - Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey

AU - Halpern-Manners, Andrew

AU - Warren, John Robert

N1 - Funding Information: Order of authorship is alphabetical to reflect equal contributions by the authors. This article was inspired by a conversation with Michael Hout, and was originally prepared for presentation at the April 2010 annual meetings of the Population Association of America. The National Science Foundation (SES-0647710) and the University of Minnesota’s Life Course Center, Department of Sociology, College of Liberal Arts, and Minnesota Population Center have provided support for this project. We warmly thank Eric Grodsky, Ross Macmillan, Gregory Weyland, anonymous reviewers, and workshop participants at the University of Minnesota, the University of Texas, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and New York University for their constructive criticism and comments. Finally, we thank Anne Polivka, Dorinda Allard, and Steve Miller at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for their helpful feedback. However, all errors or omissions are the authors’ responsibility.

PY - 2012/11

Y1 - 2012/11

N2 - Does participating in a longitudinal survey affect respondents' answers to subsequent questions about their labor force characteristics? In this article, we investigate the magnitude of panel conditioning or time-in-survey biases for key labor force questions in the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS). Using linked CPS records for household heads first interviewed between January 2007 and June 2010, our analyses are based on strategic within-person comparisons across survey months and between-person comparisons across CPS rotation groups. We find considerable evidence for panel conditioning effects in the CPS. Panel conditioning downwardly biases the CPS-based unemployment rate, mainly by leading people to remove themselves from its denominator. Across surveys, CPS respondents (claim to) leave the labor force in greater numbers than otherwise equivalent respondents who are participating in the CPS for the first time. The results cannot be attributed to panel attrition or mode effects. We discuss implications for CPS-based research and policy as well as for survey methodology more broadly.

AB - Does participating in a longitudinal survey affect respondents' answers to subsequent questions about their labor force characteristics? In this article, we investigate the magnitude of panel conditioning or time-in-survey biases for key labor force questions in the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS). Using linked CPS records for household heads first interviewed between January 2007 and June 2010, our analyses are based on strategic within-person comparisons across survey months and between-person comparisons across CPS rotation groups. We find considerable evidence for panel conditioning effects in the CPS. Panel conditioning downwardly biases the CPS-based unemployment rate, mainly by leading people to remove themselves from its denominator. Across surveys, CPS respondents (claim to) leave the labor force in greater numbers than otherwise equivalent respondents who are participating in the CPS for the first time. The results cannot be attributed to panel attrition or mode effects. We discuss implications for CPS-based research and policy as well as for survey methodology more broadly.

KW - Labor force

KW - Panel conditioning

KW - Survey research methods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84869134532&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84869134532&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x

DO - 10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x

M3 - Article

C2 - 22893185

AN - SCOPUS:84869134532

SN - 0070-3370

VL - 49

SP - 1499

EP - 1519

JO - Demography

JF - Demography

IS - 4

ER -

Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this