Antonovics K, Haveman R, Holden K, Wolfe B
Department of Economics, University of California, San Diego, USA.
Soc Secur Bull. 2000;63(1):40-51.
Panel surveys interview the same individuals more than once over a period of time. Attrition from the survey occurs when those individuals die, refuse to be interviewed again, or, for some other reason, cannot be contacted. If the original sample was representative of a specific population, then survey analysis may provide misleading conclusions about changes in population characteristics over time if these individuals leave the sample in a nonrandom way. Therefore, it is important to identify the characteristics of individuals who leave the survey for various reasons. This article explores the extent of and reasons for attrition in the New Beneficiary Survey (NBS) between the first interview in 1982 and the followup interview in 1991. Presented is a comparison of the characteristics of survivors (the reinterviewed sample) with attriters (those in the sample not reinterviewed) from the retired-worker and disabled-worker samples. The article explores a variety of potential determinants of attrition to the probability of attrition. These determinants are examined alone and in a multivariate framework. The NBS sample population is drawn from and linked to Social Security Administrative records, which have exact matched data on mortality as a cause of attrition. These data do not depend on survey-reported reasons for attrition; hence, it allows the examination of the differences in the patterns and predictors of attrition due to death and due to other reasons, primarily, the refusal to be interviewed. Attrition due to death must be identified precisely because misidentification of death as refusal to be interviewed may lead researchers to infer more selective attrition than might be the case. Different patterns of attrition are evident in the comparison of attrition levels and the determinants of attrition for the retired and disabled samples, both composed of persons with relatively high mortality risk. In particular, individuals' health, health insurance coverage, and level of education have different impacts on their likelihood of attrition. In general, it appears that refusal to be interviewed is more evenly spread across populations and characteristics than is death. The analysis shows that attrition due to death and attrition due to refusal are quite different processes, even though health conditions play a role in both processes. The results suggest that because attrition patterns (including death) may be quite different across population samples, sample-specific attrition patterns must be analyzed over the lifetime of any panel study. Long-term studies of panel attrition are necessary to provide researchers analyzing the data with information on potential biases due to nonrandom attrition.
面板调查会在一段时间内多次对相同个体进行访谈。当这些个体死亡、拒绝再次接受访谈，或者由于其他原因无法取得联系时，调查就会出现人员流失的情况。如果原始样本代表了特定人群，那么如果这些个体以非随机方式离开样本，调查分析可能会就人口特征随时间的变化得出误导性结论。因此，识别因各种原因离开调查的个体的特征很重要。本文探讨了1982年首次访谈至1991年后续访谈期间新受益人调查（NBS）中的人员流失程度及原因。文中呈现了退休工人样本和残疾工人样本中幸存者（再次接受访谈的样本）与流失者（样本中未再次接受访谈的那些人）的特征比较。本文探讨了各种潜在的人员流失决定因素对人员流失概率的影响。这些决定因素会单独以及在多变量框架下进行考察。NBS样本群体取自社会保障管理记录并与之关联，这些记录有关于作为人员流失原因的死亡率的精确匹配数据。这些数据不依赖于调查所报告的人员流失原因；因此，它能够考察因死亡和因其他原因（主要是拒绝接受访谈）导致的人员流失模式及预测因素的差异。必须精确识别因死亡导致的人员流失，因为将死亡误识别为拒绝接受访谈可能会导致研究人员推断出比实际情况更多的选择性人员流失。在由死亡率风险相对较高的人群组成的退休人员和残疾人员样本的人员流失水平及人员流失决定因素的比较中，不同的人员流失模式很明显。特别是，个体的健康状况、医疗保险覆盖范围和教育水平对其人员流失可能性有不同影响。一般来说，似乎拒绝接受访谈在人群和特征中的分布比死亡更为均匀。分析表明，尽管健康状况在这两个过程中都起作用，但因死亡导致的人员流失和因拒绝导致的人员流失是截然不同的过程。结果表明，由于不同人群样本的人员流失模式（包括死亡）可能差异很大，在任何面板研究的整个周期内都必须分析特定样本的人员流失模式。进行面板人员流失的长期研究对于为分析数据的研究人员提供有关因非随机人员流失导致的潜在偏差的信息是必要的。
