Systematic self-report bias in health data: impact on estimating cross-sectional and treatment effects

Article

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of systematic self-report bias, the non-random deviation between the self-reported and true values of the same measure. This bias may be constant or variable, and can mislead empirical analyses based on descriptive statistics, program evaluation and instrumental variables estimation. I illustrate these issues with data on self-reported and measured overweight/obesity status, and BMI, height and weight z-scores of public school students in California from 2004 to 2006. I find that the prevalence of overweight/obesity is 2.4–7.6% points lower in self-reported data relative to measured data in the cross-section. A school nutrition policy changed the bias differentially in the treatment and control groups so that program evaluations could find spurious positive or null impacts of the intervention. Potential channels for this effect include improved information and stigma.

Keywords

Measurement error Program evaluation Instrumental variables Survey data Obesity 

JEL classification

I10 C10 

References

  1. Bauhoff, S.: The Effect of School Nutrition Policies in California on Dietary Intake and Obesity: A Synthetic Control Approach. Working Paper (2010)Google Scholar
  2. Bound, J., Brown, C., Mathiowetz, N.: Measurement error in survey data. In: Heckman, J., Leamer, E. (eds.) Handbook of Econometrics, vol. 5, chap. 59, pp. 3705–3843. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  3. Brener, N.D., Eaton, D.K., Lowry, R., McManus, T.: The association between weight perception and BMI among high school students. Obes. Res. 12, 1866–1874 (2004)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brener, N.D., Mcmanus, T., Galuska, D.A., Lowry, R., Wechsler, H.: Reliability and validity of self-reported height and weight among high school students. J. Adolesc. Health 32, 281–287 (2003)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cawley, J.: Rational Addiction, the Consumption of Calories, and Body Weight, Ph.D. thesis (1999)Google Scholar
  6. Cawley, J., Meyerhoefer, C., Newhouse, D.L.: The impact of state physical education requirements on youth physical activity and overweight. Health Econ. 16, 1287–1301 (2007)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. CDC: YRBS 2007 Data User Manual. Technical Report, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2007)Google Scholar
  8. Ezzati, M., Martin, H., Skjold, S., Hoorn, S.V., Murray, C.J.L.: Trends in national and state-level obesity in the USA after correction for self-report bias: analysis of health surveys. J. R. Soc. Med. 99, 250–257 (2006)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Puhl, R.M., Latner, J.D.: Stigma, obesity, and the health of the nation’s children. Psychol. Bull. 133, 557–580 (2007)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Puhl, R.M., Latner, J.D.: Weight bias: new science on an significant social problem. Obesity 16, S1–S2 (2008)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Samuels, S.E., Craypo, L., Boyle, M., Stone-Francisco, S., Schwarte, L.: Improving School Food Environments Through District-Level Policies: Findings from Six California Case Studies. Technical Report, Samuels and Associates (2006)Google Scholar
  12. StataCorp: Stata Statistical Software: Release 11 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. Strauss, R.S.: Childhood obesity and self-esteem. Pediatrics 105, e15 (2000)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Vidmar, S., Carlin, J., Hesketh, K., Cole, T.: Standardizing anthropometric measures in children and adolescents with new functions for egen. Stata J. 4, 50–55 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health Care PolicyHarvard UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations