2013
DOI: 10.1007/s11205-013-0348-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Panel Conditioning and Subjective Well-being

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
33
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

5
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
3
33
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Following previous research using these data,19 29 we tested for this by repeating the estimations after including an additional variable indicating whether the individual responded at the next survey wave. If attrition bias is not present then there should be no significant association between the outcome at time t and survey participation at t+1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following previous research using these data,19 29 we tested for this by repeating the estimations after including an additional variable indicating whether the individual responded at the next survey wave. If attrition bias is not present then there should be no significant association between the outcome at time t and survey participation at t+1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The selection of time-varying covariates is based on previous longitudinal research analysing the determinants of mental health (e.g., Clark 2003;Mendolia 2014;Wooden and Li 2014). Specifically, our estimation models control for age (specified as a cubic when analysing spouses and as age fixed effects when analysing adolescents); household composition (numbers of children and adults); the presence of a long-term health condition and disability, other than mental illness (and differentiated by the extent to which the condition limits work); physical health; labour force status; preferred working hours (if employed); home ownership and real home equity; regional unemployment rates; location (a set of dummies identifying how distant the household is from a major Australian city); a measure of the socio-economic status advantage or disadvantage of the region (see ABS 2001); the presence of another adult during the survey interview; and an indicator for whether the sample member is a non-respondent at the next survey wave.…”
Section: Covariatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To test whether our results were affected by bias arising from non-random panel attrition we followed the procedure set out by Verbeek and Nijman (1992) and Wooden and Li (2014) and estimated additional models with a control for whether a respondent participated in the next wave of the survey. The estimates of this attrition control were insignificant.…”
Section: Sensitivity Analysis: Missing Values Panel Attrition and Ommentioning
confidence: 99%