Reliability of educational attainment of survey respondents: an overlooked barrier to comparability?

Abstract Educational attainment is vital in social science research for analysing socioeconomic inequalities, labour market outcomes, and health disparities. Harmonisation schemes such as the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) and its survey-specific adaptation EDULVLB aim to standardise educational classifications across countries, enabling international comparability. Despite their widespread use, concerns persist regarding the reliability of these harmonised measures, particularly at the individual level and across different survey modes. This study evaluates the reliability of harmonised educational attainment measurements using test-retest data from Estonia, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom. Respondents’ answers from the face-to-face European Social Survey Round 8 (2016) and the online CRONOS Panel Wave 6 (2018) were analysed, with reliability coefficients estimated for both the one-digit ISCED and the more detailed EDULVLB classification. The results reveal notable individual-level inconsistencies, especially in the United Kingdom, challenging assumptions of high reliability in harmonised education data. Inconsistencies were most common between adjacent educational levels, suggesting difficulties distinguishing similar qualifications. Device effects were also observed, with smartphone users displaying lower consistency than computers or tablets users. While mode effects could not be fully disentangled from measurement error, the findings underscore the need for systematic reliability assessments and improved instrument design to ensure the comparability and validity of educational measures in cross-national survey research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Published
2025-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-06051-9
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reliability of educational attainment of survey respondents: an overlooked barrier to comparability?

Roberto Briceno-Rosas
1 citations
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
4.20
article

Reliability of educational attainment of survey respondents: an overlooked barrier to comparability?

Roberto Briceno-Rosas
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Educational attainment is vital in social science research for analysing socioeconomic inequalities, labour market outcomes, and health disparities. Harmonisation schemes such as the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) and its survey-specific adaptation EDULVLB aim to standardise educational classifications across countries, enabling international comparability. Despite their widespread use, concerns persist regarding the reliability of these harmonised measures, particularly at the individual level and across different survey modes. This study evaluates the reliability of harmonised educational attainment measurements using test-retest data from Estonia, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom. Respondents’ answers from the face-to-face European Social Survey Round 8 (2016) and the online CRONOS Panel Wave 6 (2018) were analysed, with reliability coefficients estimated for both the one-digit ISCED and the more detailed EDULVLB classification. The results reveal notable individual-level inconsistencies, especially in the United Kingdom, challenging assumptions of high reliability in harmonised education data. Inconsistencies were most common between adjacent educational levels, suggesting difficulties distinguishing similar qualifications. Device effects were also observed, with smartphone users displaying lower consistency than computers or tablets users. While mode effects could not be fully disentangled from measurement error, the findings underscore the need for systematic reliability assessments and improved instrument design to ensure the comparability and validity of educational measures in cross-national survey research.

Humanities and Social Sciences CommunicationsVol. 12(1)
University of Mannheim (DE), GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences (DE)
Universität Mannheim, Leibniz-Gemeinschaft
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.