Understanding Society User Support: Issueshttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/support/favicon.ico?15995719382024-03-13T21:01:15ZUnderstanding Society User Support
Redmine Understanding Society User Support - Support #2076 (Feedback): Issues with xx_hadcvvac variables ...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/20762024-03-13T21:01:15ZLaura L
<p>Good evening,</p>
<p>I am currently analysing data from the <em>xx_indresp_w</em> datasets of the COVID-19 data collection, specifically from wave 9 (ci), wave 8 (ch) and wave 7 (cg). From the documentation, the questions <em>xx_hadcvvac</em> (about having received the COVID-19 vaccine in each survey wave) should be asked to respondents that have not already answered that they received 1 or 2 doses of vaccines in previous months (answer codes 1 and 2). However, by cross-tabulating the answers to the <em>xx_hadcvvac</em> questions for wave 7 and 9 for respondents present in wave 9 and 7 (left-joining the datasets by respondent ID <em>pidp</em>, i.e. matching all respondents in wave 9 with those that were also in wave 7):</p>
<p>table(ci_hadcvvac = wave_9$ci_hadcvvac, cg_hadcvvac = wave_9$cg_hadcvvac)</p>
<p>with <em>wave_9</em> the left-joined dataset, I obtain the following table:</p>
<pre><code>cg_hadcvvac<br />ci_hadcvvac -9 -8 -2 1 2 3 4<br /> -8 0 10 0 133 9 492 4835<br /> -2 2 0 2 0 0 0 4<br /> 1 0 0 0 4 1 1 133<br /> 2 0 3 1 <strong>1663 116</strong> 36 2538<br /> 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 5<br /> 4 0 0 0 2 0 3 322</code></pre>
<p>As you can see from the numbers in bold (took as examples), there are some respondents vaccinated in wave 7 that appear to be asked the question again in wave 9. Am I missing some information?</p>
<p>Thank you very much in advance for the support.</p>
<p>Best regards, <br />Laura</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #2074 (In Progress): Longitudinal weights https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/20742024-03-09T16:03:06ZJoe Mattock
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I'm conducting an analysis specifically over waves 2, 3, 6 and 9 for Understanding Society, as relating to the voteintent variable which is only included in these waves. I would just like to ask about the weighting procedure for this case. I am examining how an independent variable (gentrification, as measured by an index) affects voting intention at the LSOA-level.</p>
<p>My understanding is that I need to take the longitudinal weight from the final wave used in my analysis and apply it to all respondents (i_indscub_lw - I believe). However, given that my dependent variable of interest is not observed in consecutive waves, I wanted to ask whether this principle applies in the same way.</p>
<p>I also wanted to ask how this weighting would be applied in practice. I am slightly confused about the order of things. For example, would you remove all wave-specific prefixes, merge LSOA indicators with the Understanding Society data, and then apply the relevant weight for each respondent?</p>
<p>Much appreciated,</p>
<p>Joe</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #2073 (Feedback): Data filehttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/20732024-03-08T16:20:51ZLuisa Edwards
<p>What is the date period for the Wave 13 indresp file, and was this post Covid.<br />I.e would it be possible to compare a monthly COVID data set to the whole of Wave 13, looking at post Covid environment?</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1942 (In Progress): Bornuk_dv missing datahttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/19422023-07-19T13:19:05ZLuis Ortiz
<p>Dear colleagues,</p>
<p>I have observed that the derived variable "Born in UK" reports a substantial number (8.61% of observations, if I'm not wrong) of 'missing values'. The other two values are obviously 'born in UK' and 'not born in UK'. Is there any specific reason / pattern explaining these missing values.</p>
<p>Many thanks for your attention</p>
<p>And best wishes</p>
<p>Luis Ortiz Gervasi</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1914 (In Progress): job title and descriptive infor...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/19142023-06-06T10:25:52ZShiyu Yuan
<p>To who it may concern,</p>
<p>I am currently using UKHLS covid wave 7,8,9 to conduct research. In the questionnaires, jbsoc variable exists in these three waves, but in the data file, I can only find it in wave 8.</p>
<p>Also, there is no derived industry variable, and I found the question in wave 8 is checking the industry in wave 7 and in wvae 9 is checking either wave 7 and wave8. In this case, can I get the information by firstly derived one industry variable for wave 8 and then another one for wave 9.</p>
<p>The last part is regarding the marriage/cohabitation status. Can I generate a variable based on household relationships? But what if they get married but not living together? According to the way UKHLS suggests finding a partner or spouse, does it mean we can only identify a spouse or partner for couples living together that have the same household address?</p>
<p>Would you mind helping me with this issue, please?</p>
<p>best<br />shiyu</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1874 (In Progress): Issue with religion variable in...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/18742023-03-10T11:56:38ZLaurence O'Brien
<p>Hello support forum,</p>
<p>I think there might be an issue with the religion variable (l_oprlg1) in wave 12. I suspect this because nearly all the people who report belonging to both the Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnic group (l_racel values 10 and 11) have l_oprlg1 = 11, indicating Christian (no specific denomination) religion. This can't be right - in other waves the vast majority of these ethnic groups report being Muslim. There are also some weird patterns for other ethnic groups, but this is the clearest indication of a mistake.</p>
<p>I therefore wonder if there is a coding issue for the values of l_oprlg1. Is this the right place to raise this issue to be looked into?</p>
<p>Many thanks,<br />Laurence</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1839 (In Progress): Combining individual level file...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/18392023-01-12T14:10:28ZIngrid Storm
<p>I am trying to follow the suggested syntax for appending individual level files across waves into a long format. However I wish to retain some variables that are not available in all the waves.</p>
<p>When I try to use the syntax dofile available on the website (MERGING INDIVIDUAL FILES ACROSS WAVES INTO LONG FORMAT) I get error messages when it encounters variables that are only available in some waves (e.g. "variable a_simrace not found").</p>
<p>I noticed on the moodle course a command called "isvar" was proposed as a solution. However, when I try this I also get an error message, saying that "the command isvar is not recognised" (I am using Stata version 17).</p>
<p>What do you propose?</p>
<p>Thank you very much for your help</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1673 (In Progress): pensioner_dv seems to be wrong ...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/16732022-03-29T10:29:15ZTom Waters
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>The pensioner_dv variable is supposed to determine whether the respondent is past State Pension Age (SPA). But for men, in wave K, all men aged 64 or younger are defined as not being past SPA, and all men aged 65 or older are. However, men born after 6 December 1953 have a SPA after their 65th birthday (<a class="external" href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/310231/spa-timetable.pdf">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/310231/spa-timetable.pdf</a>)</p>
<p>For women this does not seem to be a problem - at least, there are 65 year old women in wave K for whom the pensioner_dv variable says they are below SPA.</p>
<p>(Though, there are 36 women in wave K who are 60 years old and pensioner_dv indicates that they are past SPA. Presumably that can't be right?)</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1627 (In Progress): Coding of k_ypfhweve in k_Youthhttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/16272022-01-10T11:24:40ZAlexandra Turner
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I have just started looking at the data in Wave K of the youth data file and found that for k_ypfhweve: "During an average week in term time, on how many evenings do you do any homework?" there were 155 cases coded as 9. I was wondering what this code relates to as I cannot find any guidance on how to interpret this data?</p>
<p>Many thanks,<br />Alexandra</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1258 (In Progress): Housing costs in BHPShttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/12582019-10-09T13:17:22ZLindsay Judge
<p>I am keen to create an after housing costs in BHPS but am unclear what is included in the variable xphsg (gross monthly housing costs). I would like to know whether this (i) includes or excludes housing benefit and (ii) includes or excludes the principal payment for those with mortgages. If the principal is included, is there a way to deduct this from xphsg (i.e. a way to split mortgage payments into interest and principal)?</p>
<p>Thanks in advance for any help.</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1250 (In Progress): Identifying transitions from ho...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/12502019-09-30T15:18:13ZTom Snell
<p>I am trying to identify transitions from households to institutions among older people aged 65+ (ideally residential or nursing homes, but otherwise any institutional setting). I'm hoping to identify all respondents known to have moved to an institution, rather than just those that are successfully followed up (<strong>w_dweltyp</strong> and <strong>w_preason</strong> provide a handful of institutional/proxy interviews).</p>
<p>Any advice on other variables to investigate would be gratefully received!</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1227 (In Progress): Family sizehttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/12272019-08-13T10:38:53ZElla Moonan-Howard
<p>To whom it may concern,</p>
<p>I am attempting to generate non-household family size variables for both waves three and six.</p>
<p>I wanted to clarify which variables denote which type of non-residential family member across the waves. In the family life module webpage nrels3 is number of children, nrels4 is number of brothers and sisters, nrels5 is number of grandchildren and nrels6 is number of grandparents - with nrels7 and nrels8 on great grandparents and great grandchildren only being measured at wave 7.</p>
<p>Yet on the details for these variables in wave three, it appears to be different suggesting that in fact, nrels2 is siblings, nrels3 is grandchildren, nrels6 is great grandparents etc.</p>
<p>If you could let me know which is correct, that would be brilliant. Moreover, in either scenario there are types of family member not accounted for in wave three. In the former it is great grandchildren and great grandparents, in the latter it is children. If you could advise me as to potential other variables I could use to account for these gaps that would be incredibly helpful.</p>
<p>thank you</p>
<p>Ella</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1167 (In Progress): Linking Understanding Society a...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/11672019-03-21T10:13:19ZInga Steinberg
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Could you please let me know what the predicted date of completion of the linking of Understanding Society and HESA data is? I am currently writing a proposal for my PhD (I'm in my first year), and want to know if I will be able to use the data for at least one of my papers.</p>
<p>Best wishes,</p>
<p>Inga</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1111 (In Progress): Data discepancy? Tenure_dv and ...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/11112018-12-04T14:37:24ZChris Foye
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I want to examine the effect of moving from the private rental tenure (PRS) to the social rental sector (SRS) on a range of social outcomes, using the BHPS and USoc. These tenures are generally understood to be physically discrete: to transition from the PRS to the SRS you have to move house. However, my analysis of BHPS/USoc suggests that almost half of those indivduals who (apparently) move from the PRS to the SRS do not (apparently) move house. This does not seem right. Some more details....</p>
<p>To identify individuals who have moved from PRS to SRS (in that direction) I look at I) "tenure_dv" and ii) tenure_dv lagged by one year (l.tenure_dv). If an individuals current tenure is SRS, and their lag tenure is PRS, then I consider them a "new srs tenant"</p>
<p>To identify whether an individual moved house or not, I use 'plnew' for the BHPS and 'movdir' for USoc. If an individual's response is 'yes' ('no) to 'plnew' then I consider them to have (not) moved house. If an individual's response to 'movdir' is 'moved direct' or 'multiple moves' then I consider them to have moved house.</p>
<p>In theory, "new srs tenants" should overwhelmingly have moved house in the previous year. But I am finding that approx' half of "new srs tenants" did not actually report moving house (based on the coding above).</p>
<p>There seem to be four possible explanations for the finding above: I) there is something wrong with my analysis, ii) contrary common knowledge, changing from PRS to SRS does not generally involve moving house (this seems v. unlikely) iii) there is an error with/misreporting of the 'tenure' variable, iv) there is an error with/misreporting of the 'movdir'/'plnew' variable</p>
<p>I'd appreciate your help.</p>
<p>Chris</p> Understanding Society User Support - Support #1038 (Resolved): Imputations for savings, investmen...https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/10382018-09-07T10:17:16ZNora Müllernora.mueller@gesis.org
<p>Dear support team, I am interested in net worth which I derive from the variables savings, investments, debts (bhps waves 5, 10, 15) and housing net of mortgages. These variables contain a lot of missings or values are reported only in bracket values. A couple of researchers have already calculated imputations for the missing values of these variables. Is there any chance these imputation values can be provided to the research community? Thank you very much for your help. Best, Nora</p>