2. EXPLORATION OF THE NONRESPONDENTS IN THE EGLHS 
30 
TABLE 4: Reasons for Loss of Target Persons per Cohort - Nonresponse Study 1996/97 
cohorts 
1930 
total 
1950 
1940 
1960 
 
aaaaaa- 
 
 
situation before starting NRS stuc 
 
 
58,5% 
55,3% 
% of persons from the initial nonrespondents 
54,3% 
63,5% 
60,6% 
who were selected for the NRS study 
(N=1246 out of 2131)/no inforation 
about proportion of refusals/ non-contacts 
 
 
 
 
.. 
 
 
. 
 
now counting these candidates for theNRS 
 
43 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
kaaaa- 
 
 
 
 
samle as 100% (N-1246). 
 
 
22,6% 
25,1% 
percentage of total neutral loss 
18,3% 
27,4% 
20,5% 
with main reasons given as: 
4.2% 
person unknown 
6,8% 
2,5% 
2,6% 
5,0% 
5,0% 
4,7% 
person has new address 
6,5% 
10,1% 
6,3% 
3 4% 
7,0% 
person died 
3.3% 
1,2% 
1,794 
— 
— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
now taking the new actualised gross 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
. 
 
 
 
 
sample as 100% (64). 
 
 
systematic loss given by: 
illness 
6,6% 
2,5% 
3,0% 
1,9% 
1,6% 
no contact 
5,6% 
2,8% 
8,4% 
8.2% 
6,3% 
70,4% 
78,2% 
69,5% 
refus al rate 
663% 
63,5% 
12,3% 
total response rate 
20,9% 
25,7% 
21,5% 
23,1% 
(counting remaining utilizable interviews) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
a 
 
 
 
 
now taking the realised interveve 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
. 
 
 
 
 
 
as100% 
no information about the number of contacts 
no individual information who was a refusal and who was a non-contacted person in the initial sampling 1991 
number of persons in the realised sample 
N= 
59 
201 
(utilisable interviews) 
26 
55 
61 
— 
 
(Categories for reasons of loss and numbers were taken from: infas methodological report (1998:28-29), see also 
TABLE 1.) 
The generally high refusal rates highlight the special character of the NRS data. What could 
finally be gathered from this study appears to be the hard-to-reach persons, who have already 
been mentioned. However, we also find that cohort 1930 has the highest refusal rates (78,2% 
against 63,5% for 1960), whereas cohort 1960 suffers most from mobility problems 
(6,8%+10,1%=16,9% person unknown or new address; 8,4% no contact rate). The following 
two figures show the composition of reasons for loss. FIGURE 7 gives the reasons for loss 
before the field started, i.e. during the phase of checking the addresses. We can recognise 
increasing problems in obtaining correct addresses for younger persons. The mobility is 
highest for cohort 1960.