Understanding Society User Support: Issueshttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/support/favicon.ico?15995719382022-01-13T18:55:36ZUnderstanding Society User Support
Redmine Understanding Society User Support - Support #1631 (Resolved): Consistencies across gross and net...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/16312022-01-13T18:55:36ZMarek Rojicek
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I have been doing some comparisons of the gross and net income variables in the hhresp files in USoc and BHPS (from SN 6614) and I have found some discrepancies that I wanted to please ask you about. I have tried looking if others have previously asked about these but couldn’t find any answers.</p>
<p>So would be grateful if you could please help with:</p>
<p>1. <strong>For both USoc and BHPS</strong>: There are a large number of households where total net income is greater than total gross income. For USoc, there are 1,713 cases where net income (fihhmnnet1_dv) is more than 1% greater than gross income (fihhmngrs_dv). For BHPS, there are 1,106 cases where net income (hhyneti) is more than 1% greater than gross income (fihhyr). For BHPS, some of these cases are potentially explained by question 2 below. But is there a reason why net income could be larger than gross incomes, such as due to transfers?</p>
<p>2. <strong>BHPS only</strong>: As part of checking the above, I found as well that there are 358 cases in BHPS where the sum of gross labour and non-labour income (fihhyl + fihhynl) is more than 1% greater than total gross income. Of these, 44 are the result of topcoding but the others seem to be inconsistent against each other. Among these there are even 59 instances of 0 total income but positive non-labour income. There are also 26 cases where there is positive total gross income but both gross labour and non-labour income are 0 (all of these cases are fully imputed). So I wanted to please ask, is it correct that in BHPS, fihhyr should equal fihhyl + fihhynl? And if yes, would it please be possible to check these cases and advise how to treat them?</p>
<p>3. <strong>BHPS only</strong>: I have also done a comparison of the net income data now included in BHPS against what was published by Jenkins and colleagues on the UK Data Service in SN 3909. From this, I have found that there are 18,682 cases where Jenkins hhyneti data was missing but positive hhyneti values are available in the new BHPS data and that these are broadly equally spread across waves. There are also 103 cases where there are positive values for both but that these differ. This compares to a total of 128,371 positive hhyneti values in the new BHPS. Would it please be possible to explain if there is a reason for why these additional values are now available and whether it is okay to use them? I have found the the 8th edition BHPS user guide where the addition of this data to BHPS was made but there are no detailed explanations around it (see appendix 4 of: <a class="external" href="https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/bhps/documentation/pdf_versions/volumes/5151userguide_vola.pdf">https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/bhps/documentation/pdf_versions/volumes/5151userguide_vola.pdf</a>). All the gross income data for these additional cases look okay though so presume that it should be fine.</p>
<p>4. <strong>BHPS only</strong>: In relation to point 3 above, there are 174 cases where gross income (fihhyr) is a positive value but net income (hhyneti) is assigned a missing value. Would it please be possible to check these?</p>
<p>5. <strong>BHPS only</strong>: It seems that in SN 6614, the BHPS gross income data are topcoded, while the net income data are not. I just wanted to check if that was intended?</p>
<p>There’s quite a bit here so I understand if it may take a while to respond!</p>
<p>Thank you very much in advance,</p>
<p>Marek</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1595 (Resolved): Modified OECD equivalence scale in...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/15952021-10-15T10:39:32ZMarek Rojicek
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I have been working the OECD equivalence scale variables in BHPS and USoc (variables eq_moecd and ieqmoecd_dv respectively) and in trying to understand how these variables were constructed, I tried recreating them as per the description provided for ieqmoecd_dv (<a class="external" href="https://www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/documentation/mainstage/dataset-documentation/variable/ieqmoecd_dv">https://www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/documentation/mainstage/dataset-documentation/variable/ieqmoecd_dv</a>). I was able to exactly replicate it for USoc using the age_dv variable in the indall data, outside of a handful of cases where the variable doby_dv does not equal to birthy.</p>
<p>However for BHPS, using the age variable in the indall data, there are a significant number of cases where the recreated OECD equivalence scale does not equal to the provided eq_moecd variable. There are 22,884 cases across all BHPS waves where the eq_moecd variable is provided as missing, despite ages being available for all members of the household in the indall data (examples of this are e.g. hidp 10883 and 5977883). There are then a further 195 cases where the eq_moecd variable is seemingly incorrect when compared to the household composition (examples of this are e.g. hidp 30069608 and 3175608).</p>
<p>Would you please be able to check these? I've been using my recreated OECD equivalence scale variable for now - but it would be good to understand if I misunderstood the derivation for BHPS (as I couldn't find exact documentation for BHPS).</p>
<p>Thank you,</p>
<p>Marek</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1570 (Resolved): BHPS hhmove variable with 0 valueshttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/15702021-08-04T21:58:18ZMarek Rojicek
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>In BHPS waves 7 and 11, the derived <em>hhmove</em> variable has blank values associated with a value label of 0. These can be seen in the variable search for <em>hhmove</em> under the relevant waves (<a class="external" href="https://www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/documentation/mainstage/dataset-documentation/variable/hhmove">https://www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/documentation/mainstage/dataset-documentation/variable/hhmove</a>).</p>
<p>It isn't however clear what these 0 values mean - would it please be possible to check these?</p>
<p>Thank you,<br />Marek</p>