| 来源类型 | Working Paper |
| 规范类型 | 报告 |
| DOI | 10.3386/w15245 |
| 来源ID | Working Paper 15245 |
| Work Disability, Work, and Justification Bias in Europe and the U.S. | |
| Arie Kapteyn; James P. Smith; Arthur van Soest | |
| 发表日期 | 2009-08-13 |
| 出版年 | 2009 |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 摘要 | To analyze the effect of health on work, many studies use a simple self-assessed health measure based upon a question such as "do you have an impairment or health problem limiting the kind or amount of work you can do?" A possible drawback of such a measure is the possibility that different groups of respondents may use different response scales. This is commonly referred to as "differential item functioning" (DIF). A specific form of DIF is justification bias: to justify the fact that they don't work, non-working respondents may classify a given health problem as a more serious work limitation than working respondents. In this paper we use anchoring vignettes to identify justification bias and other forms of DIF across countries and socio-economic groups among older workers in the U.S. and Europe. Generally, we find differences in response scales across countries, partly related to social insurance generosity and employment protection. Furthermore, we find significant evidence of justification bias in the U.S. but not in Europe, suggesting differences in social norms concerning work. |
| 主题 | Econometrics ; Data Collection ; Health, Education, and Welfare ; Health ; Labor Economics ; Labor Supply and Demand |
| URL | https://www.nber.org/papers/w15245 |
| 来源智库 | National Bureau of Economic Research (United States) |
| 引用统计 | |
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/572921 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Arie Kapteyn,James P. Smith,Arthur van Soest. Work Disability, Work, and Justification Bias in Europe and the U.S.. 2009. |
| 条目包含的文件 | ||||||
| 文件名称/大小 | 资源类型 | 版本类型 | 开放类型 | 使用许可 | ||
| w15245.pdf（210KB） | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | 浏览 | ||
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
