EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Accounting for non-response bias using participation incentives and survey design: An application using gift vouchers

Mark McGovern, David Canning and Till Bärnighausen

Economics Letters, 2018, vol. 171, issue C, 239-244

Abstract: Standard corrections for missing data rely on the strong and generally untestable assumption of missing at random. Heckman-type selection models relax this assumption, but have been criticized because they typically require a selection variable which predicts non-response but not the outcome of interest, and can impose bivariate normality. In this paper we illustrate an application using a copula methodology which does not rely on bivariate normality. We implement this approach in data on HIV testing at a demographic surveillance site in rural South Africa which are affected by non-response. Randomized incentives are the ideal selection variable, particularly when implemented ex ante to deal with potential missing data. However, elements of survey design may also provide a credible method of correcting for non-response bias ex post. For example, although not explicitly randomized, allocation of food gift vouchers during our survey was plausibly exogenous and substantially raised participation, as did effective survey interviewers. Based on models with receipt of a voucher and interviewer identity as selection variables, our results imply that 37% of women in the population under study are HIV positive, compared to imputation-based estimates of 28%. For men, confidence intervals are too wide to reject the absence of non-response bias. Consistent results obtained when comparing different selection variables and error structures strengthen these conclusions. Our application illustrates the feasibility of the selection model approach when combined with survey metadata.

Keywords: Participation incentives; Survey design; Selection bias; Non-ignorable missing data; Selection models; HIV (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C34 J11 I13 C35 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176518303008
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:171:y:2018:i:c:p:239-244

Access Statistics for this article

Economics Letters is currently edited by Economics Letters Editorial Office

More articles in Economics Letters from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dana Niculescu ().

 
Page updated 2019-04-13
Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:171:y:2018:i:c:p:239-244