 HOW BIASED ARE MEASURES OF CYCLICAL MOVEMENTS IN PRODUCTIVITY AND HOURS?Stephanie Aaronson and Andrew Figura Review of Income and Wealth, 2010, vol. 56, issue 3, 539-558 Abstract: The movement of hours worked over the business cycle is an important input into the estimation of many key parameters in macroeconomics. Unfortunately, the available data on hours do not correspond precisely to the concept required for accurate inference. We study one source of mismeasurement—that the most commonly used source data measure hours paid instead of hours worked. In particular, we focus our attention on salaried workers, a group for whom the gap between hours paid and hours worked is likely to be large. We show that the measurement gap varies significantly and positively with changes in labor demand. As a result, we estimate that the standard deviations of the workweek and of total hours worked are 27 and 5 percent larger, respectively, than published measures of hours suggest. We also find that this measurement gap is unlikely to be the source of the acceleration in published measures of productivity in the early 2000s. Date: 2010 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:revinw:v:56:y:2010:i:3:p:539-558 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Review of Income and Wealth is currently edited by Conchita D'Ambrosio and Robert J. Hill More articles in Review of Income and Wealth from International Association for Research in Income and Wealth Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.