Comparing survey data and administrative records on gross earnings: nonreporting, misreporting, interviewer presence and earnings inequality

Peter Valet (), Jule Adriaans () and Stefan Liebig ()
Additional contact information
Peter Valet: University of Bamberg
Jule Adriaans: Socio-economic Panel Study (SOEP) at German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin)
Stefan Liebig: Socio-economic Panel Study (SOEP) at German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin)

Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 2019, vol. 53, issue 1, No 24, 491 pages

Abstract: Abstract Research on earnings inequality mostly relies on survey data, but these data may not be accurate. Survey data on earnings might be biased as research indicates that some respondents are likely to avoid reporting their gross earnings and others are likely to misreport them. In addition, the mode of data collection might affect responses to sensitive questions such as those on earnings. Given these three possibilities for bias, researchers’ conclusions on the degree of earnings inequality might be systematically biased as well. By comparing survey and linked administrative data, we looked for the nonreporting and misreporting biases suggested by the literature, investigated the presence of an interviewer as another source of non- and misreporting, and compared how nonreporting, misreporting, and the mode of data collection affected conclusions on earnings inequality. The analyses drew on a German employee survey and linked administrative data from the Federal Employment Agency. Using the administrative data as a benchmark, we found that respondents at the lower and upper end of the earnings distribution were more likely to not report and to misreport their earnings. Interviewer presence led to higher nonreporting but had no effect on misreporting. All these processes and especially nonreporting and interviewer presence led to an underestimation of earnings inequality based on survey data. We relate the relevance of these results to research on inequality and survey methodology and conclude that linking survey data to administrative records could be an avenue for safeguarding conclusions on earnings inequality.

Keywords: Gross earnings; Nonreporting; Misreporting; Survey mode; Earnings inequality; Validation study (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-018-0764-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:qualqt:v:53:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-018-0764-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11135

DOI: 10.1007/s11135-018-0764-z

Access Statistics for this article

Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology is currently edited by Vittorio Capecchi

More articles in Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().