Skip to main content

Attrition and Response Effects in the Dutch National Mobility Panel

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Transportation Research, Economics and Policy ((TRES))

Abstract

In this chapter, we study the effects of under-reporting and attrition on inferences from the Dutch National Mobility Panel. Using refreshment samples, we assess the biases in the panel. We also investigate potential sources of bias, and distinguish between response effects and selective attrition. We use a random effects stochastic censoring model and exploratory methods to estimate the size of the attrition bias. We indicate some limitations on the type of inferences from the panel, and discuss possibilities to minimize attrition bias by choosing an appropriate sample design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ahn, H. and Powell., J.L. (1990) Semiparametric Estimation of Censored Selection Models with a Nonparametric Selection Mechanism. Discussion paper, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becierrt, S., Gould, W., Lrlard, L. and Welch, F. (1988) The panel study of income dynamics after fourteen years: An evaluation. Journal of Labor Economics, 6, 472–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cosslerr, S.R. (1991) Semiparametric estimation of a regression model with sample selectivity. In Nonparametric and Semiparametric Methods in Econometrics and Statistics,W.A. Barnett et al.,eds., Cambridge University Press, pp. 127–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubin, J. and Mcfadden, D. (1984) An econometric analysis of residential electric appliance holdings and consumption. Econometrica, 52, 345–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J.A. and Wise, D.A. (1979) Attrition bias in experimental and panel data: The Gary income maintenance experience. Econometrica, 47, 455–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck Man, J.J. (1979) Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47, 153–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J. and Singer, B. (1984) A method for minimizing the impact of distributional assumptions in econometric models for duration data. Econometrica, 52, 271–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J. (1990) Varieties of selection bias. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 313–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensiier, D.A. (1989) An assessment of attrition in a multi-wave panel of households. In Urban Dynamics and Spatial Choice Behaviour,J. Hauer et al.,eds., Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 105–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, C. (1986) Analysis of Panel Data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ichatura, H. (1988) Semiparametric Least Squares Estimation of Single Index Models. Department of Economics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ichudura, H. and Lee, L.F. (1991) Semiparametric least squares estimation of multiple index models. In Nonparametric and Semiparametric Methods in Econometrics and Statistics,W.A. Barnett et al.,eds., Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krr.Ssuita, R. and Bow, P.H.L. (1987) Analysis of attrition biases and trip reporting errors for panel data. Transportation Research, 21A, 287–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, T. (1992) The Theory of Choice-Based Sampling. Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island (mimeo).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lrrru, R.J.A. and Rubin, D.B. (1987) Statistical Analysis with Missing Data, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P.R. and Rubin, D.B. (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridder, G. (1990) Attrition in multi-wave panel data. In Panel Data and Labor Market Studies,J. Hartog et al.,eds. North-Holland, pp. 45–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridder, G. (1992) An empirical evaluation of some models for non-random attrition in panel data. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 3, 337–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanwissen, L.J.G and Meurs, H.J. (1989) The Dutch Mobility Panel: Experiences and evaluation. Transportation, 16, 99–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, M. (1991) The Design of Panel Surveys and the Treatment of Missing Observations. PhD thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, Tilburg.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Meurs, H., Ridder, G. (1997). Attrition and Response Effects in the Dutch National Mobility Panel. In: Golob, T.F., Kitamura, R., Long, L. (eds) Panels for Transportation Planning. Transportation Research, Economics and Policy. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2642-8_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2642-8_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5184-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-2642-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics