Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Incomplete Panels and Selection Bias

  • Chapter
The Econometrics of Panel Data

Part of the book series: Advanced Studies in Theoretical and Applied Econometrics ((ASTA,volume 28))

Abstract

In this chapter attention will be paid to selection bias in panel data. In case of selection bias a rule other than simple random sampling determines how sampling from the underlying population takes place. This selection rule may distort the representation of the true population and consequently distort inferences based on the observed data using standard methods. Distorting selection rules may be the outcome of self-selection decisions of agents, nonresponse decisions of agents or decisions of sample survey statisticians. Many existing panel data, sets suffer from missing observations due to nonresponse of agents or design decisions of survey statisticians. Both sources of missing observations may imply a non-random selection rule. Additionally, in many economic applications decisions of individual agents imply a distorting selection rule. Examples of these types of self-selection are the endogenous decisions to join the labor force or to participate in some social program.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aigner, D.J. and P. Balestra, [1988]: Optimal Experimental Design for Error Components Models, Econometrica, 56, 955–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amemiya, T., [1984]: Tobit Models: A Survey, Journal of Econometrics, 24, 3–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amemiya, T., [1985]: Advanced Econometrics, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arellano, M., [1988]: An Alternative Transformation for Fixed Effects Models with Predetermined Variables, Applied Economics Discussion Paper 57, University of Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltagi, B.H., [1985]: Pooling Cross-Sections with Unequal Time-Series Lengths, Economics Letters, 18, 133–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, R.M. and T.A. Heberlein, [1984]: Recent Research on Mailed Questionnaire Response Rates, in: D.C. Lockhart, ed., Making Effective Use of Mailed Questionnaires, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biørn, E., [1981]: Estimating Economic Relations from Incomplete Cross-Section/Time-Series Data, Journal of Econometrics, 16, 221–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Björklund, A., [1989]: Potentials and Pitfalls of Panel Data: the Case of Job Mobility, European Economic Review, 33, 537–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, G., [1980]: Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data, Review of Economic Studies, 47, 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury, G., [1991]: A Comparison of Covariance Estimators for Complete and Incomplete Panel Data Models, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 53, 83–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury, G., and S. Nickell, [1985]: Hourly Earnings in the United States: Another Look at Unionization, Schooling, Sickness and Unemployment Using PSID Data, Journal of Labor Economics, 3, 38–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton, A., [1990]: Saving and Income Smoothing in the Cote d’lvoire, mimeo, Princeton University.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLeeuw, E.D., J.J. Hox and J. Van derZouwen, [1989]: Data Quality in Mail Surveys as Compared to Face to Face and Telephone Interviews: a Meta-Analysis of the Research Literature, Kwantitatieve Methoden, 31, 123–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempster, A.P., N. Laird and D.B. Rubin, [1977]: Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data via the EM Algorithm, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 39, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R.F., D.F. Hendry and J.-F. Richard, [1983]: Exogeneity, Econometrica, 51, 277–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourieroux, C. and A. Monfort, [1989]: Statistique et Modeles Econometriques, Vol. 1, Economica, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goyder, J.C., [1982]: Further Evidence on Factors Affecting Response Rates to Mailed Questionnaires, American Sociological Review, 47, 550–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W.H., [1981]: Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error: Comment, Econometrica, 49, 795–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenlees, J.S., W.S. Reece and K.D. Zieschang, [1982]: Imputation of Missing Values When the Probability of Response Depends on the Variable Being Imputed, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 77, 251–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gronau, R., [1974]: Wage Comparisons — A Selectivity Bias, Journal of Political Economy, 82, 1119–1143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, H.O., [1958]: Maximum Likelihood Estimation from Incomplete Data, Biometrics, 14, 174–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J.A., [1978]: Specification Tests in Econometrics, Econometrica, 46, 1251–1271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J.A. and D.A. Wise, [1979]: Attrition Bias in Experimental and Panel Data: The Gary Income Maintenance Experiment, Econometrica, 47, 455–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, M.J.R. and M. Westmacott, [1956]: Missing Values in Experiments Analyzed on Automatic Computers, Applied Statistics, 5, 203–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., [1976]: The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models, The Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5, 475–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., [1978]: Simple Statistical Models for Discrete Panel Data Developed and Applied to Test the Hypothesis of True State Dependence against the Hypothesis of Spurious State Dependence, Annates de VINSEE, 30/31, 227–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., [1979]: Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error, Econometrica, 47, 153–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., [1981a]: Statistical Models for Discrete Panel Data, in: C.F. Manski and D. McFadden, eds., Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 114–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., [1981b]: The Incidental Parameters Problem and the Problem of Initial Conditions in Estimating a Discrete Time-Discrete Data Stochastic Process, in: C.F. Manski and D. McFadden, eds., Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 179–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., [1990a]: Varieties of Selection Bias, American Economic Review (AEA Papers and Proceedings), 80, 313–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., [1990b]: Alternative Approaches to the Evaluation of Social Programs; Econometric and Experimental Methods, Barcelona Lecture, World Congress of the Econometric Society 1990, Barcelona, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., and R. Robb, [1985a]: Alternative Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Interventions, in: J.J. Heckman and B. Singer, eds., Longitudinal Analysis of Labor Market Data, Cambridge University Press, 156-245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J.J., and R. Robb, [1985b]: Alternative Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Interventions: An Overview, Journal of Econometrics, 30, 239–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, C., [1986]: Analysis of Panel Data, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalbfleisch, J.D. and D.A. Sprott, [1970]: Application of Likelihood Methods to Models Involving Large Numbers of Parameters, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 32, 175–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalton, G., [1983]: Compensating for Missing Survey Data, University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalton, G., D. Kasprzyk and D.B. McMillen, [1989]: Nonsampling Errors in Panel Surveys, in D. Kasprzyk, G. Duncan, G. Kalton and M.P. Singh, Panel Surveys, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keane, M., R. Moffitt and D. Runkle, [1988]: Real Wages over the Business Cycle: Estimating the Impact of Heterogeneity with Micro Data, Journal of Political Economy, 96, 1232–1266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J.M., [1936]: The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, London, MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kish, L., [1986]: Timing of Surveys for Public Policy, The Australian Journal of Statistics, 28, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kmenta, J., [1981]: On the Problem of Missing Measurements in the Estimation of Economic Relationships, in: E.G. Charatsis, ed., Proceedings of the Econometric Society European Meeting 1979, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kmenta, J. and P. Balestra, [1986]: Missing Measurements in a Regression Problem with no Auxiliary Relations, in: D.J. Slottje, ed., Advances in Econometrics, Vol. 5: Innovations in Quantitative Economics: Essays in Honor of Robert L. Basmann, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, H.G., [1974]: Comments on Selectivity Biases in Wage Comparisons, Journal of Political Economy, 82, 1145–1155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lien, D. and D. Rearden, [1988]: Missing Measurements in Limited Dependent Variable Models, Economics Letters, 26, 33–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lien, D. and D. Rearden, [1990]: Missing Measurements in Discrete Response Models, Economics Letters, 32, 231–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, R.J .A., [1982]: Models for Nonresponse in Sample Surveys, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 77, 237–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, R.J .A., [1985]: A Note about Models for Selectivity Bias, Econometrica, 53, 1469–1474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, R.J .A., [1988]: Missing-Data Adjustments in Large Surveys, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 6, 287–296 (with discussion).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, R.J . A . and D.B. Rubin, [1983]: On Jointly Estimating Parameters and Missing Data by Maximizing the Complete-Data Likelihood, The American Statistician, 37, 218–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, R.J.A. and D.B. Rubin, [1987]: Statistical Analysis with Missing Data, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddala, G.S., [1983]: Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C.F., [1989]: Anatomy of the Selection Problem, The Journal of Human Resources, 24, 343–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C.F., [1990a]: Severity of the Selection Problem in the Absence of Prior Information, working paper 9004, Social Systems Research Institute, University of Wisconsin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C.F., [1990b]: Nonparametric Bounds on Treatment Effects, American Economic Review, AEA Papers and Proceedings, 80, 319–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matyas, L. and L. Lovrics, [1991]: Missing Observations and Panel Data: A Monte-Carlo Analysis, Economics Letters, 37, 39–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meghir, C. and M. Saunders, [1987]: Attrition in Company Panels and the Estimation of Investment Equations, working paper, University College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundlak, Y., [1978]: On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data, Econometrica, 46, 69–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newey, W.K., J.L. Powell and J.R. Walker, [1990]: Semiparametric Estimation of Selection Models: Some Empirical Results, American Economic Review, AEA Papers and Proceedings, 80, 324–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijman, Th.E. and M. Verbeek, [1989]: The Nonresponse Bias in the Analysis of the Determinants of Total Annual Expenditures of Households Based on Panel Data, CentER Discussion Paper 8936, Tilburg University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijman, Th.E. and M. Verbeek, [1990]: Estimation of Time dependent Parameters in Linear Models Using Cross Sections, Panels or Both, Journal of Econometrics, 46, 333–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijman, Th.E., M. Verbeek and A. vanSoest, [1991]: The Efficiency of Rotating Panel Designs in an Analysis of Variance Model, Journal of Econometrics, 49, 373–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijman, Th.E. and M. Verbeek, [1992]: The Optimal Choice of Controls and Pre-Experimental Observations, Journal of Econometrics, 51, 183–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, R.J., [1980]: A Least Squares Correction for Selectivity Bias, Econometrica, 48, 1815–1820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pudney, S., [1989]: Modelling Individual Choice. The Econometrics of Corners, Kinks and Holes, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridder, G., [1990]: Attrition in Multi-Wave Panel Data, in: J. Hartog, G. Ridder and J. Theeuwes, eds., Panel Data and Labor Market Studies, Elsevier, North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B., [1976]: Inference and Missing Data, Biometrika, 63, 581–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruud, P., [1991]: Extensions of Estimation Methods Using the EM Algorithm, Journal of Econometrics, 49, 305–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T.M.F., [1983]: On the Validity of Inferences from Non-random Samples, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 146, 394–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, M., [1990]: On the Estimation of a Fixed Effects Model with Selectivity Bias, Economics Letters, 34, 267–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, M. and Th.E. Nijman, [1992]: Testing for Selectivity Bias in Panel Data Models, International Economic Review, 33, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wansbeek, T.J. and A . Kapteyn, [1989]: Estimation of the Error Components Model with Incomplete Panels, Journal of Econometrics, 41, 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winer, R.S., [1983]: Attrition Bias in Econometric Models Estimated with Panel Data, Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 177–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C.F.J., [1983]: On the Convergence Properties of the EM Algorithm, The Annals of Statistics, 11, 95–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, J. and H. Cooper, [1983]: A Quantitative Review of Research Design Effects on Response Rates to Questionnaires, Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 36–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Marno Verbeek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Theo Nijman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    László Mátyás

  2. Budapest University of Economics, Hungary

    László Mátyás

  3. Université de Paris-Val-de-Marne and INSEE, France

    Patrick Sevestre

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Verbeek, M., Nijman, T. (1992). Incomplete Panels and Selection Bias. In: Mátyás, L., Sevestre, P. (eds) The Econometrics of Panel Data. Advanced Studies in Theoretical and Applied Econometrics, vol 28. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0375-3_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0375-3_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6655-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-0375-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation