Retention and Reasons for Non-Interview

• Mature Women cohort:
  • Eligible MW sample and reasons for non-interview
  • MW sample representativeness and attrition
• Young Women cohort:
  • Eligible YW sample and reasons for non-interview
  • YW sample representativeness and attrition

Eligible Mature Women sample and reasons for non-interview

In general, respondents selected for interviewing each year were those who participated in the initial survey and who were alive, residing within the United States at the interview date, and noninstitutionalized. (Exception: In 2003, interviews were conducted with a few institutionalized respondents. See R65097.00-R65124.00.) If a respondent had joined the Armed Forces, she would also have been excluded from interview during her enlistment, but no Mature Women respondents were members of the military during the survey period. However, the criteria used to select the eligible sample--respondents whom the Census Bureau attempts to interview in a given round--have varied somewhat over the years.

Beginning in 1968, any respondent who had refused to be interviewed during a previous round was dropped from the eligible sample. Beginning in 1971, respondents were also dropped from the eligible sample if they had not been interviewed in two consecutive surveys for reasons other than death or refusal (for example, respondents who could not be located or contacted during the field period--those with 'Reason for Noninterview' codes of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, or 11). In 1982, Census ceased dropping individuals for these two reasons but did not attempt to reinterview those already dropped. For example, a respondent who missed the 1979 and 1981 interviews, or any two consecutive interviews prior to that year, for a reason other than death or refusal was not eligible to participate in 1982 or any subsequent year. Similarly, a respondent who refused to participate in 1981 or any earlier survey was not eligible in 1982 or any later survey. However, respondents who refused to participate or missed their second consecutive interview in 1982 were retained in the sample and were eligible for all subsequent interviews, unless they died, were institutionalized, or obtained a Congressional refusal.

Table MW1 depicts reasons for exclusion from the eligible sample and the years each applied.

Each survey year, NLS staff created a cumulative 'Reason for Noninterview' variable for the full sample of respondents. This created variable is a combination of (1) the noninterview reasons provided by Census for the subset of respondents designated as eligible for interview in that survey year and (2) the reason for noninterview assigned during a previous survey to out-of-scope respondents. For several surveys, CHRR released an additional variable reflecting the reasons for noninterview for only those respondents with whom interviews were attempted that year. This type of variable is available in 1974 (R07755.00) and in 1992 (e.g., R10093.00). The number of respondents that Census designated as eligible for interviewing fluctuated by survey year. The eligible sample can be identified by adding together the interviewed respondents and the respondents with a noninterview code in the original 'Reason for Noninterview' variables, those not marked 'Revised Deceased.'

Through the survey years there was concern that the number of respondents marked 'deceased' might be underreported and that some of the other 'Reason for Noninterview' categories might thus be overreported. In 2003, the Census Bureau, through the cooperation of the Social Security Administration, obtained SSA records for respondents who had shared their Social Security number with Census to verify whether respondents were living or deceased. As was previously suspected, a comparison of the SSA data with the survey data shows a substantially higher number of deceased respondents than was initially recorded. To correct for past survey discrepancies, a revised 'Reason for Noninterview--Revised/Deceased' variable using the SSA data was created for each survey year from 1970 on.

These revised variables are:

• R01338.20
• R02053.30
• R02883.30
• R03084.30
• R03295.30
• R04565.30
• R04912.30
• R05284.30
• R06664.40
• R07215.40
• R07833.40
• R08878.40
• R10093.40
• R16014.20
• R34985.20
• R42671.20
• R63203.30
• R76154.00.

Researchers are urged to use these updated variables rather than the original 'Reason for Noninterview' variables.

Instructions to interviewers on how to code a respondent's reason for noninterview appear within the Interviewer's Reference Manuals (or Field Representative's Manuals). The set of noninterview coding categories present during the initial survey years has been supplemented over the years with additional reasons for noninterview, and the meanings of existing categories have been refined. Table MW2 presents the raw coding categories present on the public data files and specifies the survey years during which each category was utilized.

The reason for noninterview coding categories depicted in Table MW3 below were constructed from the raw coding categories as shown in Table MW2. For example, the conceptual category "can't locate" is the sum of codes "1" and "4." Table MW3 depicts the count of non-interviewed by reason and survey year.

Mature Women sample representativeness and attrition

The retention rate for the Mature Women at the final interview was 44.0 percent, or 2,237 of the original 5,083 respondents. Retention rate is defined as the percent of base-year respondents who were interviewed in any given survey year; included in the calculations are deceased and other out-of-scope respondents. An analysis of selected characteristics of respondents interviewed in the tenth year samples of the Original Cohorts found that noninterviews had not seriously distorted the sample representativeness of any of the cohorts for the characteristics studied (Rhoton 1984). A second analysis of differential attrition among wealthy and non-wealthy subsamples of each of the four Original Cohorts found that non-wealthy respondents of each cohort showed a consistent tendency toward greater attrition (Rhoton and Nagi 1991). Among the three younger cohorts, almost all of the difference between wealthy and non-wealthy subsamples is accounted for by attrition reasons other than the death of the respondent. In a more recent analysis, Zagorsky and Rhoton (1998) concluded that respondents with lower socio-economic status attrited at a higher rate than those with higher income and educational attainment. Further, the authors found that white respondents were more likely to remain in the survey than blacks and those of other races.

In Table MW4, the percentage of sampled respondents of each race is presented for the base survey year (1967) and the last interview year for which data is available. This table also provides information on numbers of deceased respondents by race.

Eligible Young Women sample and reasons for non-interview

In general, respondents selected for interviewing each year were those who participated in the initial survey and who were alive, residing within the United States at the interview date, not members of the Armed Forces, and noninstitutionalized. (Exception: In 2003, an interview was conducted with an institutionalized respondent. See R65097.00-R65124.00.). However, the criteria used to select the eligible sample--respondents whom the Census Bureau attempts to interview in a given round--have varied somewhat over the years.

Beginning in 1969, any respondent who had refused to be interviewed during a previous round was dropped from the eligible sample. Beginning in 1971, respondents were also dropped from the eligible sample if they had not been interviewed in two consecutive surveys for reasons other than death or refusal (for example, respondents who could not be located or contacted during the field period--those with 'Reason for Noninterview' codes of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, or 11). In 1983, the Census Bureau ceased dropping individuals for these two reasons, and in 1985 attempts were made to reinterview some of the dropped individuals. The following selection criteria determined which respondents would be reinterviewed (see Table YW1 for examples of each case):

1. If the respondent refused to be interviewed in 1972 or earlier, she was not eligible to be reinterviewed. See example respondent 1.
2. If the respondent missed her second consecutive survey in 1972 or earlier, she was not eligible to be reinterviewed. See example respondent 2.
3. If the respondent refused an interview in 1973 or later, survey staff attempted to reinterview her in 1985. If the respondent was interviewed in 1985, she rejoined the eligible sample for all subsequent surveys. If she was not interviewed in 1985, she remained ineligible for all subsequent surveys. See example respondent 3.
4. If the respondent was interviewed in 1971 and subsequently dropped due to two consecutive noninterviews, she was eligible for reinterview in 1985. If the respondent was interviewed in 1985, she rejoined the eligible sample for all subsequent surveys. If she was not interviewed in 1985, she remained ineligible for all subsequent surveys. See example respondent 4.
5. If the respondent first refused to participate in 1982, she was not eligible to participate in 1983 but rejoined the eligible sample in 1985. She remained in the eligible sample regardless of her interview status in 1985. See example respondent 5 in the table.
6. If the respondent was not interviewed in 1981 and 1982 for reasons other than death or refusal, she was never dropped from the sample. She remained eligible for all subsequent rounds regardless of prior participation. See example respondent 6.

Table YW2 depicts reasons for exclusion from the eligible sample and the years each applied.

Each survey year, CHRR has created a cumulative 'Reason for Noninterview' variable for the full sample of respondents. This created variable is a combination of (1) the noninterview reasons provided by Census for the subset of respondents designated as eligible for interview in that survey year and (2) the reason for noninterview assigned during a previous survey to out-of-scope respondents. In 1982, CHRR began releasing an additional variable reflecting the reasons for noninterview for only those respondents with whom interviews were attempted that year (e.g., R07564.00). The number of respondents that Census designated as eligible for interviewing fluctuated by survey year. The eligible sample can be identified by adding together the interviewed respondents and the respondents with a noninterview code in the original 'Reason for Noninterview' variables, those not marked 'Revised Deceased.'

There was concern throughout the survey years that the number of respondents marked 'deceased' might be underreported and that some of the other 'Reason for Noninterview' categories might thus be overreported. In 2003, the Census Bureau, through the cooperation of the Social Security Administration, obtained SSA records for respondents who had shared their Social Security number with Census to verify whether or not respondents were living or deceased. As was previously suspected, a comparison of the SSA data with the survey data shows a substantially higher number of deceased respondents in the more recent surveys. To correct for past survey discrepancies, a revised 'Reason for Noninterview--Revised/Deceased' variable using the SSA data was created for each survey year from 1970 on.

These revised variables are:

• R01453.20
• R02525.20
• R03353.20
• R04171.20
• R05195.20
• R05483.20
• R05874.30
• R07099.30
• R07564.70
• R08032.70
• R09473.40
• R10628.40
• R11092.40
• R12327.40
• R13652.40
• R16014.20
• R34985.20
• R42671.20
• R63203.30
• R76154.00

Researchers are urged to use these updated variables rather than the original 'Reason for Noninterview' variables.

Instructions to interviewers on how to code a respondent's reason for noninterview appear within the Interviewer's Reference Manuals (or Field Representative's Manuals). The set of noninterview coding categories present during the initial survey years has been supplemented over the years with additional reasons for noninterview, and the meanings of existing categories have been refined. Table YW3 presents the raw coding categories present on the public data files and specifies the survey years during which each category was utilized.

The reason for noninterview coding categories depicted in Tables YW4 were constructed from the raw coding categories as shown in Table YW3. For example, the conceptual category "can't locate" is the sum of codes "1" and "4." Table YW4 depicts the count of non-interviewed by reason and survey year.

Young Women sample representativeness and attrition

The retention rate for the Young Women at the final interview was 55.4 percent, or 2,859 of the original 5,159 respondents. Retention rate is defined as the percent of base-year respondents who were interviewed in any given survey year; included in the calculations are deceased and other out-of-scope respondents An analysis of selected characteristics of respondents interviewed in the tenth year samples of the Original Cohorts found that noninterviews had not seriously distorted the sample representativeness of any of the cohorts for the characteristics studied (Rhoton 1984). A second analysis of differential attrition among wealthy and non-wealthy subsamples of each of the four Original Cohorts found that non-wealthy respondents of each cohort showed a consistent tendency toward greater attrition (Rhoton and Nagi 1991). Among the three younger cohorts, almost all of the difference between wealthy and non-wealthy subsamples is accounted for by attrition reasons other than the death of the respondent. In a more recent analysis, Zagorsky and Rhoton (1998) concluded that respondents with lower socio-economic status attrited at a higher rate than those with higher income and educational attainment. Further, the authors found that white respondents were more likely to remain in the survey than blacks and those of other races.

In Table YW5, the percentage of sampled respondents of each race is presented for the base survey year (1968) and for 2003, the final year the survey was fielded. This table also provides information on numbers of deceased respondents by race.

References

Rhoton, Patricia. "Attrition and the National Longitudinal Surveys of Labor Market Experience: Avoidance, Control and Correction." Columbus, OH: CHRR, The Ohio State University, 1984.

Rhoton, Patricia and Nagi, Karima. "Attrition by Wealth in the Original NLS Cohorts." Columbus, OH: CHRR, The Ohio State University, 1991.

Zagorsky, Jay and Rhoton, Pat. "Attrition and the National Longitudinal Surveys' Mature Women Cohort." Columbus, OH: CHRR, The Ohio State University, 1998.