Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Clarification needed

    Dear StataList,

    I am reading an interesting paper by Brons et al. (2017), where on page 812 they describe how they summarised parental SES into a single index from ESS-9. Here is the excerpt:

    "Detailed country-specific information was available in the ESS on the highest level of educational attainment for both parents. This information was converted into the International Standard Level of Education (ISLED), a recently developed comparative measure of educational level. Likewise, father’s and mother’s occupation when the respondent was 14 years old are measured in the International Standard Classification of Occupation (ISCO-88), and converted into the International Socio-Economic Index of occupational status (ISEI). A principal component analysis indicated that the four indicators of educational and occupational status of the parents can be summarized into a single index with high reliability (Cronbach’s = 0.85 for all countries pooled). The index was constructed after standardizing and averaging the four indicators. An average score was calculated jointly for both parents because we are interested in the overall effect of parents’ SES rather than to what extent fathers or mothers are more influential. This parental SES index was again standardized to a Z-metric (mean = 0, SD = 1) within countries, so that the effects of this variable in all countries refer to a unit SD."

    I am trying to do the same but using the ESS-9 (2018). I am not sure what I am doing wrong; however, after removing missings and recoding father's/mother's educational and occupational scale on the same scale, my Cronbach alpha on the four items is slightly over 0.4, which is certainly not enough for building a single index. Could someone please advise on how to do things correctly here?

    Thank you very much in advance.
    Last edited by Sofiya Volvakova; 04 Feb 2023, 03:19.

  • #2
    Sofiya:
    as per FAQ:
    1) please provide full reference of the sources you mention (aka: "May the source be with you " and with interested listers, too). Thanks;
    2) please provide, between CODE delimiters, whatb you typed and what Stata gave you back. Thanks.
    Kind regards,
    Carlo
    (Stata 19.0)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Carlo Lazzaro View Post
      Sofiya:
      as per FAQ:
      1) please provide full reference of the sources you mention (aka: "May the source be with you " and with interested listers, too). Thanks;
      2) please provide, between CODE delimiters, whatb you typed and what Stata gave you back. Thanks.
      Hey Carlo,

      I am not sure if I can share the dataset here but the data comes from ESS-9 (2018). The paper I'm referring to comes from: Parental Socio-Economic Status and First Union Formation: Can European Variation Be Explained by the Second Demographic Transition Theory? | European Sociological Review | Oxford Academic (oup.com)

      Again, I want to build an index of parental SES, which is a combination of father's and mother's education and occupational status (4 components).

      My commands were as follows:

      * Missings for edulvlfb: (55) Other, (77) Refusal, (88) Don't know, (99) Other
      mvdecode edulvlfb, mv (55 77 88 99)
      * Missings for edulvlmb: (55) Other, (77) Refusal, (88) Don't know, (99) Other
      mvdecode edulvlmb, mv (55 77 88 99)
      * Missings for emprf14: (4) Father dead/absent, (7) Refusal, (8) Don't know, (9) No answer
      mvdecode occf14b, mv (66 77 88 99)
      * Missings for occm14b: (66) Not applicable, (77) Refusal, (88) Don't know, (99) No answer
      mvdecode occm14b, mv (66 77 88 99)

      recode edulvlfb (0/2 = 1) (3/4 = 2) (5/6 = 3)
      label define labelsetfed 1 "Low" 2 "Medium" 3 "High" // explicitly defining labelset
      label value edulvlfb labelsetfed

      recode edulvlmb (0/2 = 1) (3/2 = 2) (5/6 = 3)
      label define labelsetmed 1 "Low" 2 "Medium" 3 "High" // explicitly defining labelset
      label value edulvlmb labelsetmed

      recode occf14b (8 = 1) (3/7 9 = 2) (1/2 = 3)
      label define labelsetfoc 1 "Low skill level" 2 "Medium skill level" 3 "High skill level" // explicitly defining labelset
      label value occf14b labelsetfoc

      recode occm14b (8 = 1) (3/7 9 = 2) (1/2 = 3)
      label define labelsetmoc 1 "Low skill level" 2 "Medium skill level" 3 "High skill level" // explicitly defining labelset
      label value occm14b labelsetmoc

      alpha edulvlfb edulvlmb occf14b occm14b
      Last edited by Sofiya Volvakova; 04 Feb 2023, 07:19.

      Comment


      • #4
        Sofiya:
        could it be that the difference is explaned by a different number of missing values in your vs. Brons et al.'s datasets?
        Kind regards,
        Carlo
        (Stata 19.0)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Carlo Lazzaro View Post
          Sofiya:
          could it be that the difference is explaned by a different number of missing values in your vs. Brons et al.'s datasets?
          Thanks for your reply, Carlo. This could be, as they use a dataset from 2006 and I use the dataset from 2018. I ran Pearson's correlation and then checked Cronbach's Alpha, with my alpha only amounting to 0.44 vs. their reported 0.85. Could you please advice if these are correct steps for building an index? Any advice on what else could be done? Thank you

          Comment


          • #6
            Sofiya_
            provided that I'm not familiar with data coming from ESS-9, your approach seems reasonable.
            Other Stata commands that spring to my mind for this kind of research are; -pca- and -egen- with its many useful function.
            However, I'd recommend you to follow the approache(s) that is/are most frequent in your research field.
            Kind regards,
            Carlo
            (Stata 19.0)

            Comment

            Working...
            X