On Probabilistic Expectations and Rounding in Surveys

Fabian Gouret

No 2016-10, THEMA Working Papers from THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise

Abstract: Answers to subjective probability questions in surveys are mainly heaped to different degrees at multiples of 5 or 10, suggesting that respondents round their responses. Taking these responses at face value is clearly problematic for gross form of rounding, given that a respondent gives a point response when only a wide interval response is meaningful. This paper analyzes three subjective probability questions posed in the Survey of Economic Expectations. The specific format of these questions permits, under some mild assumptions, to develop for each question a measure related to the extent of rounding. Whatever the question, a substantial fraction of answers are rounded grossly; it includes a majority of the 50s, as well as numerous M10. We are also able to find that younger respondents are more likely to provide a gross rounding to one of the question which asks them their expectations concerning the Social Security benefits that they will collect when they will turn 70.

Keywords: probabilistic expectations; rounding; interval data; partial identification. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C81 C83 D8 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://thema.u-cergy.fr/IMG/pdf/2016-10.pdf (application/pdf)

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:ema:worpap:2016-10

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in THEMA Working Papers from THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Stefania Marcassa ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).