Comparing diary and survey estimates on time use

European Sociological Review

Volumn 28, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 622-632

  Schulz, Florian ^a   Grunow, Daniela ^b  

^a INSTITUTE FOR EMPLOYMENT RESEARCH IAB   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867428038     PISSN: 02667215     EISSN: 14682672     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/esr/jcr030     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (30)

1. Baxter, J. and Bittman, M. (1995). Measuring time spent on housework: A comparison of two approaches. Australian Journal of Social Research, 1, 21-46.
2. Belli, R. F. et al. (2000). Decomposition can harm the accuracy of behavioral frequency reports. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 295-308.
3. Bonke, J. (2005). Paid work and unpaid work. Diary information versus questionnaire information. Social Indicators Research, 70, 349-368.
4. Borg, I. and Galinat, W. H. (1985). Der Einfluß von Merkmalen der Situation auf das Erleben ihrer Dauer. Zeitschrift für experimentelle und angewandte Psychologie, 32, 353-369.
5. Gershuny, J. (2004). Costs and benefits of time sampling methodologies. Social Indicators Research, 67, 247-252.
6. Grunow, D. et al. (2006). Zeitverwendung im Alltag. Zusatzinstrumente zum ifb-Zeitverwendungstagebuch. ifb-Materialien 4-2006. Bamberg: Staatsinstitut für Familienforschung.
7. Juster, F. T., Ono, H. and Stafford, F. P. (2003). An assessment of alternative measures of time use. Sociological Methodology, 33, 19-54.
8. Kan, M. Y. (2008). Measuring housework participation: The gap between ''stylised'' questionnaire estimates and diary-based estimates. Social Indicators Research, 86, 381-400.
9. Kan, M. Y. and Pudney, S. (2008). Measurement errors in stylised and diary data on time use. Sociological Methodology, 38, 101-132.
10. Kan, M. Y. and Gershuny, J. (2009). Calibrating stylised time estimates using UK diary data. Social Indicators Research, 93, 239-243.
11. Kitterød, R. H. and Lyngstad, T. H. (2005). Diary versus questionnaire information on time spent on housework-The case of Norway. Electronic International Journal of Time Use Research, 2, 13-32.
12. Künzler, J. (1999). Arbeitsteilung in Ehen und nichtehelichen Lebensgemeinschaften. In Klein, T. and Lauterbach, W. (Eds.), Nichteheliche Lebensgemeinschaften. Analysen zum Wandel partnerschaftlicher Lebensformen. Opladen: Leske & Budrich, pp. 235-268.
13. Künzler, J. et al. (2001). Gender Division of Labour in Unified Germany. Tilburg: University Press.
14. Lee, Y.-S. and Waite, L. J. (2005). Husbands' and wives'time spent on housework: A comparison of measures. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 328-336.
15. Marini, M. M. and Shelton, B. A. (1993). Measuring household work: recent experience in the United States. Social Science Research, 22, 361-382.
16. Niemi, I. (1993). Systematic error in behavioural measurement: comparing results from interview and time budget studies. Social Indicators Research, 30, 229-244.
17. Niemi, I. (2009). Sharing of tasks and lifestyle among aged couples. Electronic International Journal of Time Use Research, 6, 286-305.
18. Otterbach, S. and Sousa-Poza, A. (2010). How accurate are German work-time data? A comparison of timediary reports and stylized estimates. Social Indicators Research, 97, 325-339.
19. Press, J. E. and Townsley, E. (1998). Wives' and husband's housework reporting. Gender, class, and social desirability. Gender and Society, 12, 118-218.
20. Robinson, J. P. (1985). The validity and reliability of diaries versus alternative time use measures. In Juster, F. T. and Stafford, F. P. (Eds.), Time, Goods and Well-Being. Ann Arbor: University Press of Michigan, pp. 33-62.
21. Robinson, J. P. (1999). The time-diary method. Structure and uses. In Pentland, W. E. et al. (Eds.) Time Use in the Social Sciences. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 47-89.
22. Schröder, H. and Ganzeboom, H. (2009). Measuring and modelling educational levels in European societies. Paper presented at European Consortium for Sociological Research, Paris, December, 12, 2009.
23. Schulz, F. (2008). Tagein, tagaus. Zur Erhebung der Zeitverwendung im Rahmen der Vorstudie zum Beziehungs- und Familienentwicklungspanel. In Feldhaus, M. and Huinink, J. (Eds.), Neuere Entwicklungen in der Beziehungs- und Familienforschung. Vorstudien zum Beziehungs- und Familienentwicklungspanel. Würzburg: Ergon, pp. 291-319.
24. Schulz, F. and Grunow, D. (2007). Tagebuch versus Zeitschätzung. Ein Vergleich zweier unterschiedlicher Methoden zur Messung der Zeitverwendung für Hausarbeit. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 19, 106-128.
25. Schulz, F. et al. (2005). Zeitverwendung im Alltag. Das ifb-Zeitverwendungstagebuch. ifb-Materialien 3-2005.
26. Bamberg: Staatsinstitut für Familienforschung. Statistisches Bundesamt (Ed.), (2004). Alltag in Deutschland. Analysen zur Zeitverwendung. Forum der Bundesstatistik. Band 43. Wiesbaden. Statistisches Bundesamt (Ed.), (2006a). Datenreport 2006.
27. Zahlen und Fakten über die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
28. Statistisches Bundesamt (Ed.), (2006b). Statistical Yearbook 2006 for the Federal Republik of Germany. Wiesbaden.
29. Ver Ploeg, M. et al. (Eds.) (2000). Time-use Measurement and Research. Washington: National Academy Press.
30. Zellner, A. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 57, 348-368.