HETUS Pilot Group 6 Revised and new dimensions in time diaries Kimberly Fisher, Centre for Time Use Research – co-ordinator Tania Cappadozzi, Laura Castell, Jonathan Gershuny, Aslıhan Kabadayı, Hannu Paäkkönen, Dragana Djokovic Papic, Chris Payne, and external consultant Kai Ludwigs 3 January 2016

Key considerations for surveys Relevant to current policy priorities Take advantage of opportunities offered by new data collection technologies Explore capacity to add to information collected by the HETUS Comparability with previous surveys Relevant to respondents Easy to complete, minimise respondent burden Easy to use, minimise researcher burden

Topics covered by Group 6 Revising who else was present Revising reporting of secondary activities Improve subjective well-being questions Adding an enjoyment / happiness field Collecting use of internet, smart devices Measuring physical activity Measuring energy use and environmental impact Measuring weather, environmental risks

Who else was present - now Specified tick-boxes Alone With household children too young to complete the diary Other household members Other known people

Who present – what is missing Only collect alone / not alone for single person households; unrelated adult households Not always possible to link spouses Do not know age / gender of people present Know almost nothing about time with people who live in other households

Who present – what is missing Hard to tell time between parents and non- resident children (HETUS activity codes for care only, only limited episodes recorded) Hard to identify time use of people providing care to people from other households Hard for users to map household diaries Respondents write who present details we lose

Swedish model Alone Write in the names of household members People from other households

Can we be alone with others? Does who we are with on-line matter?

Who present – improvements Experiment building on the Swedish model – perhaps allow diarists to write in non-household and people present on-line Retain capacity to recode to older HETUS codes Allow people to record alone with others, use separate code to distinguish these cases in alone column in data

Reporting secondary activities Some activities combine HETUS code domains (walk to the shop to buy food while walking the dogs) Possible to do more than 1 main and 1 secondary activity (prepare meal, supervise children, listen to radio) Respondents write down multiple activities – at moment choices made about what detail to lose

Consider allowing multiple secondary activity reports? Prioritise what goes into 2nd, 3rd secondary activity column to maximise comparability

Subjective well-being Satisfaction with life in general, health, and other subjective well being questions in the individual questionnaire have a variety of scales (0-5; 0-7; 0-10) OECD guidelines (being updated this week), other standardisation Follow an international standard for such questions

Happiness / Enjoyment Column Episode level well-being is part of the well-being picture for individuals & societies Need this information for policies to reduce harm Allows assessment of unintended consequences of behaviour change Successful in HETUS from France, Italy & UK Meaningful to respondents Neutral/positive impact on response rates

SWB Column tests Scale for ratings What question to ask exactly? Better for all diaries to include the same question or for subsamples to ask different questions? Which episode level SWB questions have the most policy relevance and explain the most about people’s time use?

Use of internet & smart devices Observations of Klas Rydenstam, Statistics Sweden – the more familiar you are with devices, the less you report their use Identify technologically isolated populations Need to collect meaningful device use data Smart devices change content of many activities More burden to write down that a smart device is involved than to tick a box reflecting smart device use

Use of internet & smart devices The UK model did not increase respondent burden, will this hold true in other countries? A smart device column collects more episodes than diaries without this column collect – need to consider backwards comparability for cross-time analysis both in terms of time and episodes Can/should we distinguish single from simultaneous multiple device use?

Additional information smart devices can collect Physical activity Healthy / unhealthy behaviours More precise location Weather / pollution / exposure data Energy usage Environmental impact of behaviour

Capacity to match in data Date / time information and location on the diary day permit matching of some data to time use surveys – including access to services & facilities, weather / pollution / exposure readings, range of transportation options Need possibility of restricted access to micro data to create new variables by matching data Need to check new variables to ensure anonymity of respondents

Pilot Group 6 Priorities Retain reporting of alone and with others simultaneously when this is reported Possibly consider retaining reporting of multiple secondary activities Retain capacity to arrange restricted access to microdata to match in administrative data, such as weather, exposure, or access to facilities, to construct new variables

Pilot Group 6 Priorities Experiment with alternatives for reporting who else was present Capture which household members present in a way that is easier for data users Detail about people from other households Possibly time with people on-line Standardise subjective well-being questions in the individual questionnaires

Pilot Group 6 Priorities Experiment with enjoyment / happy diary field Which questions to ask How to implement How to calibrate Impact on participation / diary burden Experiment to collect use of smart devices – how well does UK model translate elsewhere? Examine backwards comparability issues from adding enjoyment and smart device use fields