Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published January 1999

Empirical Analysis of Attrition and Underreporting in Mailback and Personal Interview Panel Surveys

Abstract

Panel data, in which the same observational units are surveyed at several points in time, offer a number of important advantages compared with more conventional cross-sectional or time-series data. However, panel data are also susceptible to specific forms of bias that do not affect cross-sectional or time-series data, for example, panel attrition, fatigue, and conditioning. If these sources of bias are not properly taken into account in the preanalysis of panel data, they may lead to serious distortion of the conclusions of substantive analyses. It is therefore important to seek a better understanding of the nature of these biases, how they arise, and how to deal with them. The objective of this paper is to explore these issues by presenting the results of the preanalysis of two different panel datasets collected in different countries at different times and using different survey approaches. The patterns of wave-to-wave attrition in the two datasets are compared, and various approaches to dealing with this problem are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Iida Y., and Kitamura R. Dynamic Travel Behavior Analysis. Transportation Research, Vol. 24A, No. 6, 1990.
2. Golob T. F., Kitamura R., and Long L. (eds.). Panels for Transportation Planning: Methods and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht and Boston, 1997.
3. Raimond T., and Hensher D. A. A Review of Empirical Studies and Applications. In Panels for Transportation Planning: Methods and Applications (Golob T. F., Kitamura R., and Long L., eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht and Boston, 1997.
4. Hsiao C. Analysis of Panel Data. Econometric Society Monograph 11. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1986.
5. Van der Hoorn T., and Van der Loop H. Dutch Transportation Planning and the Use of Longitudinal Analysis. Presented at International Conference on Dynamic Travel Behavior Analysis, Kyoto University, 1989.
6. Murakami E., and Watterson W. T. Developing a Household Travel Panel Survey for the Puget Sound Region. In Transportation Research Record 1285, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1990, pp. 40–46.
7. Duncan G. J., Juster F. T., and Morgan J. N. The Role of Panel Studies in Research on Economic Behavior. Transportation Research, Vol. 21A, No. 4/5, 1987, pp. 249–263.
8. Magnusson D., and Bergman L. R (eds.). Data Quality in Longitudinal Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1990.
9. Richardson A. J., Ampt E. S., and Meyburg A. H. Survey Methods in Transport Planning. Eucalyptus Press, Melbourne, Australia, 1995.
10. Hensher D. A. Issues in the Pre-analysis of Panel Data. Transportation Research, Vol. 21A, No. 4/5, 1987, pp. 265–285.
11. Van Vissen L., and Meurs H. J. The Dutch Mobility Panel: Experiences and Evaluation. Transportation, Vol. 16, No. 2, 1989, pp. 99–109.
12. Kitamura R., and Bovy P. H. L. Analysis of Attrition Biases and Trip Reporting Errors for Panel Data. Transportation Research, Vol. 21A, No. 4/5, 1987, pp. 287–302.
13. Hensher D. A., Smith N. C., Milthorpe F. W., and Barnard P. O. Dimensions of Automobile Demand. North Holland, London, 1992.
14. Pendyala R. M., Goulias K., Kitamura R., and Murakami E. Development of Weights for a Choice-Based Panel Survey Sample with Attrition. Transportation Research, Vol. 27A, No. 6, 1993, pp. 477–492.
15. Brownstone D., and Chu X. Multiple Imputed Sampling Weights: A Simple General Method for Consistent Inference with Panel Attrition. In Panels for Transportation Planning: Methods and Applications (Golob T. F., Kitamura R. and Long L., eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht and Boston, 1997.
16. Giuliano G., and Golob T. F. Using Longitudinal Methods for Analysis of a Short-Term Transportation Demonstration Project. Transportation, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1990, pp. 1–28.
17. Winter R. S. Attrition Bias in Econometric Models Estimated with Panel Data. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 20, 1993, pp. 177–186.
18. Verbeek M., and Nijman T. Incomplete Panels and Selection Bias. In The Econometrics of Panel Data (Mátyás L. and Sevestre P., eds.), Kluwer, Amsterdam, 1992.
19. Meurs H. J., Van Wissen L., and Visser J. Measurement Biases in Panel Data. Transportation, Vol. 16, No. 2, 1989, pp. 175–194.
20. Golob T. F., and Meurs H. Biases in Response over Time in a Seven-Day Travel Diary. Transportation, Vol. 13, No. 3, 1986, pp. 163–181.
21. Hanson S., and Huff J. O. Assessing Day-to-Day Variability in Complex Travel Patterns. In Transportation Research Record 891, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1982, pp. 18–24.
22. Ramjerdi F. Impacts of the Cordon Toll in Oslo/Akershus, Based on a Panel Study of 1989-1990. TRU/025/91. Transport Economics Institute, Oslo, Norway, 1992.
23. Polak J. W., and Meland S. An Assessment of the Effects of the Trondheim Toll Ring on Travel Behavior and the Environment. In Proc., First World Congress on the Applications of Transport Telematics and Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems, Artech House, London, 1994, Vol. 2, pp. 994–1001.
24. Heckmann J. J., and Robb R. Alternative Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Interventions: An Overview. Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 30, 1985, pp. 239–267.
25. Kurani K. S., Turrentine T., and Sperling D. Demand for Electric Vehicles in Hybrid Households: An Exploratory Analysis. Transport Policy, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1994, pp. 244–256.
26. Brög W., Meyburg A. H., and Wermuth M. J. Development of Survey Instruments Suitable for Determining Nonhome Activity Patterns. In Transportation Research Record 944, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1983, pp. 1–12.
27. Traugott M. W., and Katosh J. P. Response Validity in Surveys of Voting Behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 42, 1979, pp. 359–377.
28. Waterton J., and Lievesley D. Attrition in a Panel Study of Attitudes. Journal of Official Statistics, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1987, pp. 267–282.
29. Goulias K., Pendyala R., and Kitamura R. Updating a Panel Survey Questionnaire. In Selected Readings in Transport Survey Methodology (Ampt E. S., Richardson A. J., and Meyburg A. H., eds.), Eucalyptus Press, Melbourne, Australia, 1992.
30. Stokes G. Bus Users and Car Choosers: An Analysis of the 1988 South Yorkshire Household Travel Survey. TSU Ref. 537. Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, 1990.
31. Meland S., and Tretvik T. RVU Trondheim 1990: Planlegging, gjennomføring og foreløpige resultater. Notat 699/90. SINTEF, Trondheim, 1990.
32. Ridder G. Attrition in Multi-Wave Panel Data. In Panel Data and Labour Market Studies (Hartog J., Ridder G., and Theeuwes J., eds.), Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 1990.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published: January 1999
Issue published: January 1999

Rights and permissions

© 1999 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

John Polak
Centre for Transport Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Exhibition Road, London SW7 2BU, United Kingdom

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 11

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 2

  1. Measurement of non-random attrition effects on mobility rates using tr...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Detecting and Statistically Correcting Sample Selection Bias
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub