[Andridge, R.R. and R.J. Little. 2010. “A Review of Hot Deck Imputation for Survey Non-response.” International Statistical Review 78(1): 40–64.10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00103.x313033821743766]Search in Google Scholar
[Antoni, M., A. Ganzer, and P. vom Berge. 2016. Sample of Integrated Labour Market Biographies (SIAB) 1975–2014. FDZ-Datenreport 4, Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany. Avaiable at: http://doku.iab.de/fdz/reporte/2016/DR_04-16_EN.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Antoni, M. and S. Seth. 2011. ALWA-ADIAB – linked individual survey and administrative data for substantive and methodological research. FDZ-Methodenreport 12, Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany. Avaiable at: http://doku.iab.de/fdz/reporte/2011/DR_05-11.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Biemer, P.P., R.M. Groves, L.E. Lyberg, N.A. Mathiowetz and S. Sudman. 2011. Measurement Errors in Surveys. John Wiley & Sons.]Search in Google Scholar
[Blossfeld, H.-P., H-G. Roßbach, and J. Von Maurice. 2011. “Education as a Lifelong Process.” Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft Sonderheft 14. ISBN: 978-3-531-17785-4.10.1007/s11618-011-0198-z]Search in Google Scholar
[Brick, J.M. and G. Kalton. 1996. “Handling Missing Data in Survey Research.” Statistical Methods in Medical Research 5(3): 215 –238. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096228029600500302.10.1177/0962280296005003028931194]Search in Google Scholar
[Brücker, H., M. Kroh, S. Bartsch, J. Goebel, S. Kühne, E. Liebau, P. Trübswetter, I. Tucci and J. Schupp. 2014. “The New IAB-SOEP Migration Sample: An Introduction into the Methodology and the Contents.” SOEP Survey Papers 216. Avaiable at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/103964.]Search in Google Scholar
[Calderwood, L. and C. Lessof. 2009. “Enhancing Longitudinal Surveys By Linking to Administrative Data.” In Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys, edited by P. Lynn, 55–72. New York: Wiley. ISBN: 978-0-470-01871-2.10.1002/9780470743874.ch4]Search in Google Scholar
[Chen, J. and J. Shao. 2000. “Nearest Neighbor Imputation for Survey Data.” Journal of Official Statistics 16(2): 113–131. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/nearest-neighbor-imputation-for-survey-data.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Conti, P.L., D. Marella and M. Scanu. 2012. “Uncertainty Analysis in Statistical Matching.” Journal of Official Statistics 28(1): 69–88. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/uncertainty-analysis-in-statistical-matching.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Conti, P.L., D. Marella and M. Scanu. 2016. “Statistical Matching Analysis for Complex Survey Data with Applications.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 111(516): 1715–1725. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/01621459.2015.1112803.10.1080/01621459.2015.1112803]Search in Google Scholar
[Cox, D.R. and D. Oakes. 1984. Analysis of Survival Data. CRC Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[da Silva, M.E.M., C.M. Coeli, M. Ventura, M. Palacios, M.M.F. Magnanini, T.M.C.R. Camargo and K.R. Camargo. 2012. “Informed Consent for Record Linkage: A Systematic Review.” Journal of Medical Ethics 38(10): 639 – 642. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2011-100208.10.1136/medethics-2011-10020822403083]Search in Google Scholar
[D’Orazio, M., M. Di Zio and M. Scanu. 2006a. “Statistical Matching for Categorical Data: Displaying Uncertainty using Logical Constraints.” Journal of Official Statistics 28(1): 137 – 157. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/statistical-matching-for-categorical-data-displaying-uncertainty-and-using-logical-constraints.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[D’Orazio, M., M. Di Zio and M. Scanu. 2006b. Statistical Matching: Theory and Practice. John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/0470023554]Search in Google Scholar
[D’Orazio, M., M. Di Zio and M. Scanu. 2009. “Uncertainty Intervals for Nonidentifiable Parameters in Statistical Matching.” Proceedings of the 57th session of the International Statistical Institute, August 16–22, 2009, Durban, South Africa.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fellegi, I.P. and A.B. Sunter. 1969. “A Theory for Record Linkage.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 64(328): 1183 – 1210. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1969.10501049.10.1080/01621459.1969.10501049]Search in Google Scholar
[Filippello, R., U. Guarnera and G. Jonas Lasinio. 2004. “Use of auxiliary information in statistical matching.” Proceedings of the XLII Conference of the Italian Statistical 9–11 June 2014, Bari, Italy: 37–40.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fosdick, B.K., M. DeYoreo and J.P. Reiter. 2016. “Categorical Data Fusion using Auxiliary Information.” The Annals of Applied Statistics 10(4): 1907–1929. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/16-AOAS925.10.1214/16-AOAS925]Search in Google Scholar
[Fulton, J.A. 2012. Respondent Consent to Use Administrative Data, Ph. D. thesis, University of Maryland.]Search in Google Scholar
[GDPR. 2016. “Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation).” Official Journal of the European Union L119: 1–88. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gilula, Z. and R. McCulloch. 2013. “Multi Level Categorical Data Fusion using Partially Fused Data.” Quantitative Marketing and Economics 11(3): 353 – 377. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11129-013-9136-0.10.1007/s11129-013-9136-0]Search in Google Scholar
[Gilula, Z., R.E. McCulloch and P.E. Rossi. 2006. “A Direct Approach to Data Fusion.” Journal of Marketing Research 43(1): 73–83. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.1.73.10.1509/jmkr.43.1.73]Search in Google Scholar
[Herzog, T.N., F.J. Scheuren and W.E. Winkler. 2007. Data Quality and Record Linkage Techniques. Springer Science & Business Media.]Search in Google Scholar
[Jacobebbinghaus, P. and S. Seth. 2010. Linked-Employer-Employee-Daten des IAB: LIAB – Querschnittmodell 2, 1993–2008. FDZ-Datenreport, Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany.]Search in Google Scholar
[Jenkins, S.P., L. Cappellari, P. Lynn, A. Jäckle and E. Sala. 2006. “Patterns of Consent: Evidence from a General Household Survey.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 169(4): 701–722. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00417.x.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00417.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Kadane, J.B. 1978. “Some Statistical Problems in Merging Data Files.” Compendium of Tax Research, 159–179, Reprint in Journal of Official Statistics 17(3): 423–433. Avaiable at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ff271eeeca694f47ae99b942de61df83/some-statistical-problems-in-merging-data-files.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kreuter, F., J.W. Sakshaug and R. Tourangeau. 2016. “The Framing of the Record Linkage Consent Question.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 28(1): 142–152. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edv006.10.1093/ijpor/edv006]Search in Google Scholar
[Little, R.J. and D.B. Rubin. 2002. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data, (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781119013563]Search in Google Scholar
[Meinfelder, F. 2013. “Datenfusion: Theoretische Implikationen und praktische Umsetzung.” In Weiterentwicklung der amtlichen Haushaltsstatistiken, edited by T. Riede, N. Ott and S. Bechthold, 83–98. Berlin: GWI Wissenschaftspolitik Infrastrukturentwicklung.]Search in Google Scholar
[Moriarity, C. and F. Scheuren. 2001. “Statistical Matching: A Paradigm for Assessing the Uncertainty in the Procedure.” Journal of Official Statistics 17(3): 407–422. Available at: https://www.scb.se/contentassets/ca21efb41fee47d293bbee5bf7be7fb3/statistical-matching-a-paradigm-for-assessing-the-uncertainty-in-the-procedure.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Moriarity, C. and F. Scheuren. 2003. “A Note On Rubin’s Statistical Matching using File Concatenation.” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics (21): 65–73. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/073500102288618766.10.1198/073500102288618766]Search in Google Scholar
[Mostafa, T. 2016. “Variation within Households in Consent to Link Survey Data to Administrative Records: Evidence from the UK Millennium Cohort Study.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 19(3): 355–375. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1019264.10.1080/13645579.2015.1019264]Search in Google Scholar
[Ness, A.R. 2004. “The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) – A Resource for the Study of the Environmental Determinants of Childhood Obesity.” European Journal of Endocrinology 151(Suppl 3): U141–U149. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1530/eje.0.151u141.10.1530/eje.0.151u14115554899]Search in Google Scholar
[Oberski, D.L., A. Kirchner, S. Eckman and F. Kreuter. 2017. “Evaluating the Quality of Survey and Administrative Data with Generalized Multitrait-Multimethod Models.” Journal of the American Statistical Association. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2017.1302338.10.1080/01621459.2017.1302338]Search in Google Scholar
[Paass, G. 1985. “Statistical Record Linkage Methodology: State of the Art and Future Prospects.” Bulletin of the International Statistical Society. Proceedings of the 45th Session. Voorburg, Netherlands: ISI.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rässler, S. 2002. Statistical Matching: A Frequentist Theory, Practical Applications, and Alternative Bayesian Approaches. Springer Science & Business Media.10.1007/978-1-4613-0053-3_2]Search in Google Scholar
[Rässler, S. 2003. “A Non-Iterative Bayesian Approach to Statistical Matching.” Statistica Neerlandica 57(1): 58–74. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9574.00221.10.1111/1467-9574.00221]Search in Google Scholar
[Rässler, S. and H. Kiesl. 2009. “How Useful are Uncertainty Bounds? Some Recent Theory with an Application to Rubin’s Causal Model.” Proceedings of the 57th Session of the International Statistical Institute, August 16–22, 2009, Durban, South Africa. Available at https://www.isi-web.org/index.php/publications/proceedings.]Search in Google Scholar
[Renssen, R.H. 1998. “Use of Statistical Matching Techniques in Calibration Estimation.” Survey Methodology 24: 171–184. Available at: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/12-001-x/1998002/article/4354-eng.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rodgers, W.L. 1984. “An Evaluation of Statistical Matching.” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 2(1): 91 – 102. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1984.10509373.10.1080/07350015.1984.10509373]Search in Google Scholar
[Rubin, D.B. 1976. “Inference and Missing Data.” Biometrika (3): 581–592. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2335739.10.2307/2335739]Search in Google Scholar
[Rubin, D.B. 1978. “Multiple Imputation in Sample Surveys – a Phenomological Bayesian Approach to Nonresponse.” Proceedings of the Survey Research Method Section of the American Statistical Association: Joint Statistical Meetings 1978, San Diego, U.S.A.: 20–30. Available at: http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/index.html.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rubin, D.B. 1986. “Statistical Matching using File Concatenation with Adjusted Weights and Multiple Imputations.” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 4(1): 87–94. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1986.10509497.10.1080/07350015.1986.10509497]Search in Google Scholar
[Rubin, D.B. 1987. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. Wiley.10.1002/9780470316696]Search in Google Scholar
[Sakshaug, J.W., M.P. Couper, M.B. Ofstedal and D.R. Weir. 2012. “Linking Survey and Administrative Records: Mechanisms of Consent.” Sociological Methods & Research 41(4): 535–569. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124112460381.10.1177/0049124112460381492863527375305]Search in Google Scholar
[Sakshaug, J.W. and M. Huber. 2016. “An Evaluation of Panel Nonresponse and Linkage Consent Bias in a Survey of Employees in Germany.” Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 4(1): 71–93. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smv034.10.1093/jssam/smv034]Search in Google Scholar
[Sakshaug, J.W., S. Hülle, A. Schmucker and S. Liebig. 2017. “Exploring the Effects of Interviewer- and Self-administered Survey Modes on Record Linkage Consent Rates and Bias.” Survey Research Methods 11(forthcoming): 171 – 188. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18148/srm/2017.v11i2.7158.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sakshaug, J.W. and F. Kreuter. 2012. “Assessing the Magnitude of Non-Consent Biases in Linked Survey and Administrative Data.” Survey Research Methods 6(2): 113–122. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18148/srm/2012.v6i2.5094.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sakshaug, J.W. and B. Vicari. 2017. “Obtaining Record Linkage Consent from Establishments: The Impact of Question Placement on Consent Rates and Bias.” Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology.Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smx009.10.1093/jssam/smx009]Search in Google Scholar
[Sala, E., J. Burton and G. Knies. 2012. “Correlates of Obtaining Informed Consent to Data Linkage: Respondent, Interview, and Interviewer Characteristics.” Sociological Methods & Research 41(3): 414– 439. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124112457330.10.1177/0049124112457330]Search in Google Scholar
[Schulte Nordholt, E., J. Van Zeijl and L. Hoeksma. 2014. Dutch Census 2011, Analysis and Methodology, Technical report, Statistics Netherlands. ISBN: 978-90-357-1948-4. Available at: https://www.cbs.nl/NR/rdonlyres/5FDCE1B4-0654-45DA-8D7E-807A0213DE66/0/2014b57pub.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sims, C. 1972. “Comments on Okner (1972).” Annals of Economic and Social Measurement (1): 343–345.]Search in Google Scholar
[Singh, A., H. Mantel, M. Kinack and G. Rowe. 1993. “Statistical Matching: Use of Auxiliary Information as an Alternative to the Conditional Independence Assumption.” Survey Methodology 19(1): 59–79. Available at: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/12-001-X199300114475.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sozialgesetzbuch. 1997. SGB Drittes Buch (III) – “Arbeitsförderung”.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sozialgesetzbuch. 2003. SGB Zweites Buch (II) – “Grundsicherung für Arbeitsuchende”.]Search in Google Scholar
[Trappmann, M., J. Beste, A. Bethmann and G. Müller. 2013. “The PASS Panel Survey After Six Waves.” Journal for Labour Market Research 46(4): 275–281. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12651-013-0150-1.10.1007/s12651-013-0150-1]Search in Google Scholar
[Van Buuren, S. and K. Groothuis-Oudshoorn. 2011. “MICE: Multivariate Imputation By Chained Equations in R.” Journal of Statistical Software 45(3). Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03.10.18637/jss.v045.i03]Search in Google Scholar
[Wu, C. 2004. “Combining Information from Multiple Surveys through the Empirical Likelihood Method.” Canadian Journal of Statistics 32(1): 15 – 26. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3315996.10.2307/3315996]Search in Google Scholar