Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 251

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Estimation of Measurement Error in Panel Data *

Wiley, David E., Wiley, James A., Blalock Jr., H.M.·2017·Causal Models in Experimental Designs

Abstract

This chapter considers models for the estimation of measurement error on the same population over time. It is useful to distinguish between a causal model, describing the structure of causal relations between “true scores,” and a measurement model, which describes the relationship between measured scores and true scores. Models for empirical phenomena may be evaluated with respect to their formal mathematical properties or with respect to their correspondence with the phenomenon. As an illustration we apply the lag-1 model, assuming homogeneous-error variance, to repeated observations on reported earnings. An increase in the time interval between measurements should lead to more dramatic differences between the models. The distinction between path analysis and path-regression analysis is crucial where one is attempting to compare the parameters of several populations. The distinction is equally important for models characterizing stable processes or where stability is assumed in order to achieve identifiability.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4324/9781315081670-9

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 251

Metadata

Authors
Wiley, D. E., Wiley, J. A., & Blalock Jr., H. M.
Venue
Causal Models in Experimental Designs
Publisher
Routledge
Published
2017-07-12
Pages
133-132
OpenAlex
W2050937055
Cited by
251
References
0
FWCI
19.50
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Estimation of Measurement Error in Panel Data *. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9781315081670-9
The paper
Wiley, D. E., Wiley, J. A., & Blalock Jr., H. M. (2017). The Estimation of Measurement Error in Panel Data *. Causal Models in Experimental Designs. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315081670-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.