Current practice in the modelling of age, period and cohort effects with panel data: a commentary on Tawfik et al. (2012), Clarke et al. (2009), and McCulloch (2012)

Current practice in the modelling of age, period and cohort effects with panel data: a commentary... This comment assesses how age, period and cohort (APC) effects are modelled with panel data in the social sciences. It considers variations on a 2-level multilevel model which has been used to show apparent evidence for simultaneous APC effects. We show that such an interpretation is often misleading, and that the formulation and interpretation of these models requires a better understanding of APC effects and the exact collinearity present between them. This interpretation must draw on theory to justify the claims that are made. By comparing two papers which over-interpret such a model, and another that in our view interprets it appropriately, we outline best practice for researchers aiming to use panel datasets to find APC effects, with an understanding that it is impossible for any statistical model to find and separate all three effects. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality & Quantity Springer Journals

Current practice in the modelling of age, period and cohort effects with panel data: a commentary on Tawfik et al. (2012), Clarke et al. (2009), and McCulloch (2012)

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/current-practice-in-the-modelling-of-age-period-and-cohort-effects-zt7VcTJ3zG
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Subject
Social Sciences, general; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Social Sciences, general
ISSN
0033-5177
eISSN
1573-7845
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11135-013-9881-x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This comment assesses how age, period and cohort (APC) effects are modelled with panel data in the social sciences. It considers variations on a 2-level multilevel model which has been used to show apparent evidence for simultaneous APC effects. We show that such an interpretation is often misleading, and that the formulation and interpretation of these models requires a better understanding of APC effects and the exact collinearity present between them. This interpretation must draw on theory to justify the claims that are made. By comparing two papers which over-interpret such a model, and another that in our view interprets it appropriately, we outline best practice for researchers aiming to use panel datasets to find APC effects, with an understanding that it is impossible for any statistical model to find and separate all three effects.

Journal

Quality & QuantitySpringer Journals

Published: May 28, 2013

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off