We investigate the nature of measurement error in time-use data. Analysis of “stylized” recall questionnaire estimates and diary-based estimates of housework time from the same respondents of a British survey gives evidence of systematic biases in the stylized estimates and large random errors in both types of estimates. We examine the effect of these measurement problems on three common types of statistical analyses in which the time-use variable is used as: (1) adependent variable, (2) an explanatory variable, and (3) a basis for cross-tabulations. We develop methods to correct the biases induced by these measurement errors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaxterJ.BittmanMichael1995. “Measuring Time Spent on Housework: A Comparison of Two Approaches.”Australian Journal of Social Research1:21–46.
2.
BianchiSuzanne M.MilkieM. A.SayerL. C.RobinsonJohn P.2000. “Is Anyone Doing Housework? Trends in the Gender Division of Household Labor.”Social Forces79:191–222.
3.
BianchiSuzanne M.RobinsonJohn P.MilkieMelissa A.2004. Changing Rhythms of American Family Life.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
4.
BonkeJens2005. “Paid Work and Unpaid Work: Diary Information Versus Questionnaire Information.”Social Indicators Research70:349–68.
5.
BryantKeithW.ZickCathleen D.1996. “An Examination of Parent-Child Shared Time.”Journal of Marriage and the Family58:227–37.
6.
FrazisHarleyStewartJay2004. “What Can Time-Use Data Tell Us About Hours of Work?”Monthly Labor Review127:3–9.
7.
GershunyJonathan2000. Changing Times: Work and Leisure in Postindustrial Society.Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
8.
JacobsJerry A.1998. “Measuring Time at Work: Are Self-Reports Accurate?”Monthly Labor Review121:42–53.
9.
JusterF. ThomasOnoHiromiStaffordFrank P.2003. “An Assessment of Alternative Measures of Time Use.” Pp. 19–54 in Sociological Methodology, vol. 33, edited by StolzenbergRoss M.Boston, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
10.
JusterThomasF.StaffordFrank P.1985. Time, Goods, and Weil-Being.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
11.
KanM. Y.2008. “Measuring Housework Participation: The Gap between “Stylized” Questionnaire Estimates and Diary-based Estimates.”Social Indicators Research86:381–400.
12.
KitterødRagni HegeHovdeLyngstad Torkild2005. “Diary Versus Questionnaire Information on Time Spent on Housework–-the Case of Norway.”Electronic International Journal of Time Use Research2:13–32.
13.
LeeYun-SukWaiteLinda J.2005. “Husbands’ and Wives’ Time Spent on Housework: A Comparison of Measures.”Journal of Marriage and Family67:328–36.
14.
MariniMargaret MooneyAnneShelton Beth1993. “Measuring Household Work: Recent Experience in the United States.”Social Science Research22:361–82.
15.
NiemiIiris1993. “Systematic Error in Behavioural Measurement: Comparing Results from Interview and Time Budget Studies.”Social Indicators Research30:229–44.
16.
PressJulie E.TownsleyEleanor1998. “Wives’ and Husbands’ Housework Reporting: Gender, Class, and Social Desirability.”Gender and Society12:188–218.
17.
RobinsonJohn P.1985. “The Validity and Reliability of Diaries Versus Alternative Time Use Measures.” Pp. 33–62 in Time, Goods, and Weil-Being, edited by JusterF. T.StaffordF. P.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
18.
RobinsonJohn P.BostromAnn1994. “The Overestimated Workweek? What Time Diary Measures Suggest.”Monthly Labor Review117:11–23.
19.
RobinsonJohn P.ChenuAlainAlvarezAnthony S.2002. “Measuring the Complexity of Hours at Work: The Weekly Work Grid.”Monthly Labor Review125:44–54.
20.
RobinsonJohn P.GodbeyGeoffrey1997. Time for Life: The Surprising Ways Americans Use Their Time.University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
21.
ZellnerA.1962. “An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias.”Journal of the American Statistical Association57:348–68.
