Understanding Society User Support: Issueshttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/support/favicon.ico?15995719382023-12-19T09:56:11ZUnderstanding Society User Support
Redmine Support #2016 (Resolved): Family connectionshttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/20162023-12-19T09:56:11ZStav Federman
<p>Hello,</p>
<p>I have a few questions regarding family connections:</p>
<p>1. I read the user guide for the family matrix (xhhrel) and want to ensure I understand how family connections are formed. As I understand it, information is collected for core sample members and their household members. So if I see a connection between an adult child and a parent, it means that they had to be cohabitating in one of the waves of the survey. Hence, if a person did not cohabit with their parents at any point, I wouldn't have any information regarding this family connection. Is that true? <br />2. Suppose that the core sample member lived alone in waves 1-3, and then cohabited with their adult child in wave 4, and then the child moved out (from wave 5 onwards). Then, is the child being followed for the rest of the waves (4 and onwards), or is he being sampled just for the wave in which he cohabits with the core sample member (wave 4)? <br />3. Does the family matrix contain connections made in the British Household Panel Survey as well, or only connections of family members cohabitating in understanding society?</p>
<p>Thank you</p> Support #2006 (Resolved): Longitudinal analysis using calendar year?https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/20062023-12-12T13:52:21ZMarina Kousta
<p>Hello,</p>
<p>I am reaching out to kindly request help on how to conduct longitudinal analysis using calendar year datasets.<br />1) Although online you state the published calendar year data are meant to be used for cross-sectional analysis, does that also stand for when we create our own calendar year datasets? Or is it meant to be a guidance only for when you release the pre-made calendar year data? If that is the case regardless, is there some way for us to still conduct longitudinal analysis after creating our own calendar year data?<br />2) Although you recommend using the w_month (sample month) to create calendar year data, would it still be ok to instead use the interview date instead, when the exact date is of great importance to the research question itself (i.e. when testing the introduction or removal of a social policy).</p>
<p>Many thanks in advance for your time and consideration.</p>
<p>Best wishes,<br />Marina</p> Support #1999 (Resolved): treatment of HMOshttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/19992023-12-05T14:30:43ZMarika Cioffi
<p>Hi, I am interested in how USOC treats full-time students and HMOs in terms of households composition. More specifically,<br />Are full-time students living alone or with other people (not family) considered as being one-person households or are they part of the household of their parents?<br />Are they the “reference person” of their own household or are they just a member of the household where one of their parents is the reference person?</p> Support #1843 (Resolved): missing data on parental educationhttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/18432023-01-19T19:03:27ZYaojun LiYaojun.Li@manchester.ac.uk
<p>Dear Sir/Madam,</p>
<p>Sorry to trouble you again.</p>
<p>I wish to ask a question on parental education in the USoc. I understand that the BHPS data were 'rolled-in' at W2 of the USoc and parental education was asked at W13 of the BHPS. Information of parental education was also collected at w1 of the USoc. So, in the USoc, parental education was a combination of the BHPS W13 and USoc W1 data. Looking at the xwdat at Wave 12 of the Usoc, I could see that both paedqf and maedqf contain both BHPS and USoc sources information.</p>
<p>. ta xwdat_dv paedqf</p>
<pre><code>Study enumerated in: | Father's educational qualifications<br /> UKHLS, BHPS or both | missing don't kno he did no he left s he left s he gained he gained other | Total<br />----------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------<br />in UKHLS xwavedat onl | 68,481 0 1,381 15,084 8,756 8,596 4,584 239 | 107,121<br />in BHPS xwavedat only | 21,326 664 44 2,496 804 1,202 332 2 | 26,870<br /> in both | 5,976 781 93 4,659 1,765 2,390 716 22 | 16,402<br />----------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------<br /> Total | 95,783 1,445 1,518 22,239 11,325 12,188 5,632 263 | 150,393</code></pre>
<p>. ta xwdat_dv maedqf</p>
<pre><code>Study enumerated in: | Mother's educational qualifications<br /> UKHLS, BHPS or both | missing don't kno she did n she left she left she gaine she gaine other | Total<br />----------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------<br />in UKHLS xwavedat onl | 66,753 0 2,323 17,359 11,305 6,151 3,075 155 | 107,121<br />in BHPS xwavedat only | 21,326 503 45 2,855 1,156 758 226 1 | 26,870<br /> in both | 5,917 529 108 5,179 2,554 1,563 536 16 | 16,402<br />----------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------<br /> Total | 93,996 1,032 2,476 25,393 15,015 8,472 3,837 172 | 150,393</code></pre>
<p>My question is: why is there so much missing on parental education? 92902/150393 = 61.8%</p>
<p>. ta paedqf maedqf</p>
<pre><code>Father's educational | Mother's educational qualifications<br /> qualifications | <del>9. missi -1. don't 1. she di 2. she le 3. she le 4. she ga 5. she ga 97. other | Total<br />---------------------</del><ins>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</ins>----------<br /> <del>9. missing | 92,902 0 148 1,275 819 481 147 11 | 95,783 <br /> -1. don't know | 0 711 5 384 194 134 17 0 | 1,445 <br />1. he did not go to s | 12 6 1,182 189 95 25 6 3 | 1,518 <br />2. he left school wit | 327 126 465 17,291 2,723 1,069 227 11 | 22,239 <br />3. he left school wit | 271 69 408 2,429 6,260 1,384 500 4 | 11,325 <br />4. he gained post sch | 387 112 150 3,271 3,656 3,879 702 31 | 12,188 <br />5. he gained a univer | 79 8 102 494 1,221 1,477 2,229 22 | 5,632 <br /> 97. other | 18 0 16 60 47 23 9 90 | 263 <br />---------------------</del><ins>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</ins>----------<br /> Total | 93,996 1,032 2,476 25,393 15,015 8,472 3,837 172 | 150,393</code></pre>
<p>I would be most grateful for your explanation and guidance.</p>
<p>Best wishes and many thanks in advance.</p>
<p>Yaojun</p> Support #1700 (Resolved): Interview timinghttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/17002022-05-13T09:40:34ZNils Braakmann
<p>Dear Understanding Society team,</p>
<p>I was hoping you might be able to help me with a question: We are currently studying the effect of local economic shocks on various individual outcomes. We use the exact timing of the interviews to distinguish between individuals interviewed before and after the shocks. Previous papers (e.g., Powdthavee, N., Plagnol, A.C., Fritjers, P. and Clark, A.E. (2019). Who got the Brexit blues? The effect of Brexit on subjective wellbeing in the UK. Economica 86: 471-494. or Braakmann, N. (2021). Immigration status uncertainty and mental health – Evidence from Brexit. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society 60: 521- 548.) have relied on the argument that the timing of the interview is essentially orthogonal to the respective shock (Brexit in the two cases above). I am now currently dealing with a reviewer who has pointed out that "In Germany, there are for instance studies that show that timing of interview correlates with the socio-economic background of the respondents.” This strikes me as a valid point - if there is selectivity on such characteristics and if these characteristics correlate with whatever shock is being looked at, this could indeed cause bias. Before I go and do 20 tests on interview timings and various respondent characteristics, I was wondering whether you have any information about any selectivity or how interviews are timed that you might be willing to share.</p>
<p>All best and thank you in advance,<br />Nils</p> Support #1693 (Resolved): household datahttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/16932022-05-03T11:33:51ZThanos Verousis
<p>Hello<br />Can you please confirm the following: if a household consists of two members eg a married couple, does the survey contain responses from both members? For example, can we get the cognitive ability measures for both partners?<br />Thanks<br />Thanos</p> Support #1653 (Resolved): Representativeness of lone mothershttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/16532022-02-07T10:28:37ZTom Waters
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I have been comparing the UKHLS data to data from the FRS and LFS. For reasons not clear to me, the UKHLS data seem to be very significantly different when looking at lone mothers.</p>
<p>I attach two .do files which calculate the share of lone mothers that are homeowners, and the age that lone mothers finished education, in both the FRS and UKHLS (for 2009-10 data in FRS, and wave A in UKHLS). It should run if you simply change the "path" global at the top to specify where FRS/UKHLS data are saved.</p>
<p>The results are very different. In the FRS, 16% of lone mothers finished full time education aged 19 or older, and 35% own their own home. In UKHLS those figures are 32% and 47% respectively.</p>
I have tried a number of variations:
<ul>
<li>These differences hold in other years/waves too</li>
<li>The differences persist if you do not weight the data</li>
<li>The LFS gives figures very similar to FRS, not UKHLS</li>
<li>If you look at the whole population (rather than just lone mothers), the two surveys are pretty similar for homeownership, but there is still a much higher rate of leaving education at 19 or later in UKHLS</li>
<li>Similar differences seem to hold for lone mothers for other outcomes, including employment (higher in UKHLS) and the take-up of out-of-work benefits (lower in UKHLS)</li>
</ul>
<p>Very grateful for any guidance in what might be going on here.</p> Support #1629 (Resolved): Merging Variable vote_7https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/16292022-01-13T16:30:31ZJan Heinicke
<p>Dear Madame or Sir,</p>
<p>i am a stundent and am using the bhps and ukhls datasets in a project.</p>
<p>I have a question concerning the merge of the waves of the BHPS and the UKHLS.<br />We are using the Code that is shared online public to merge the datasets across waves and wanted to use the vote_7<br />variable for our analysis.<br />But when we used the loop that is included in the merge, the resulting variable vote_7 has a category 7 in wave 7 of BHPS with 700 observations and there is the info of a subsample which we can not find in the data.<br />Also, the merge led to 0 observations in wave 8 of the BHPS, but we can not identify the error for that.<br />Could you maybe tell us how to solve that problem or how to handle it?</p>
<p>THank you for your time and help.</p>
<p>Best wishes,</p>
<p>Jan</p> Support #1591 (Resolved): Design and testing of questionnaire questionshttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/15912021-10-11T08:37:30ZWill BarnesWilliam.Barnes.2014@live.rhul.ac.uk
<p>For my PhD data collection that's beginning next week, I'm interested in using some of the questions asked in the UK Household Longitudinal Study around satisfaction with different life domains (I believe they are: sclfsat1, sclfsat2, sclfsat7, sclfsato and then the one that asks about job satisfaction too which I can't find the code for) to tie my small-scale in-depth mainly qualitative project with other studies that have used data from your database.</p>
<p>I wanted to a) check that this would be okay, and b) ask how these questions have been designed? Have they been taken from an accepted standardised scale, been tested, or been through some kind of psychometric validation process?</p>
<p>Thank you for your help.</p>
<p>Will</p> Support #1198 (Resolved): Weighting data Wave 8 h_indresphttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/11982019-06-12T07:47:26ZSarah H
<p>Hi</p>
<p>The US provides instructions on pages 65 to 71. Section 3.3 to choose the correct Variable to Weight the data.<br />I have selected n_indpxui_xw because I'm using the individual dataset and not excluding proxy responses. <br />However, the naming convention on page 71 suggests that n_indpxus_xw would be the correct weight? This variable is not available in the dataset that I'm using. N_indpxus_lw is indeed available but LW stands for longitudinal data and I'm only doing analysis of one wave. therefore this is not longitudinal. Instead XW weights that stand for cross-sectional data, i.e. using one wave cross-sectional data. <br />n_indpxui_wv is the only variable that is cross-sectional that is available in the dataset I have selected this as the correct weight to use? Can you confirm this please</p>
<p>best wishes</p>
<p>Sarah</p> Support #1160 (Resolved): sample size - households in NI in latest wavehttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/11602019-03-13T15:15:27Zgillian young
<p>I would like to know how many households are represented in the most recent wave (full year) for Northern Ireland. I apoligise if Q is not appropriate but I was advised to come via this route in response to email sent last week.</p> Support #1089 (Resolved): Does the data collection procedure of US fit the rule of randomization? https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/10892018-11-07T15:11:20ZJing Shenjing.shen@mzes.uni-mannheim.de
<p>I'm conducting a study about the impact of the Brexit Referendum on life satisfaction using a difference-in-difference approach, which requires a random assignment between the control and treated groups. My question is: can we say respondents were not selectively interviewed before and after the Referendum (June 23, 2016); namely, the chance for one to be interviewed before and after a certain date is random? Can we make such an assertion?</p> Support #1003 (Resolved): Id Pnohttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/10032018-07-16T18:08:53ZGiorgio Piccittogiorgio.piccitto@unimi.it
<p>Dear Users, <br />I would like to know your advise on how identifying the progressive number of each member of household (and so understanding his\her 'position' within the household).<br />I mean, I understood that the variable <del>pno</del> identifies this, but I did not find its legend (so what 1, 2, 3, ... stand for).</p>
<p>Thanks a lot, best, G.</p> Support #978 (Resolved): different size in "merge" and "previously been interviewed"https://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/9782018-05-30T12:42:13ZEduwin Pakpahan
<p>Dear all, <br />I am a new user of understanding society, so pls apologize if my question is quite basic. <br />I am trying to merge the wave1 and wave2 data, i.e. merging "b_indresp.dta" and "a_indresp.dta". Using merge function in stata (the stata code is 'merge 1:1 pidp using ... '), I found 38388 participants were both in wave1 and 2, 162019 were new entrants in wave 2 and 12606 were in wave 1 only. Then I look at those who have been interviewed before, by 'tab b_ff_ivlolw', I found 46164 individual had previously been interviewed. This is bigger than 38388 I obtained beforehand.</p>
<p>Do I miss something here or misunderstood with the b_ff_ivlolw?</p> Support #944 (Resolved): Lowest level reliability with spatial datahttps://iserredex.essex.ac.uk/support/issues/9442018-03-23T09:39:01ZPaul Downward
<p>I am currently supervising a PhD student who is very interested in exploring the environmental influences on individual well-being and, consequently, undertaking some analysis of how spatial features might influence this. We would naturally apply to use the special license access data but could I ask an initial question about what is the lowest level that the study is designed to give reliable inferences. Thus, as we drill down are their spatial gaps in the sampling?</p>