labor to be linked positively to educational attainment, as a proxy for cognitive skills, so that recall bias is lower among more educated households.<sup>11</sup> Second, we consider gender differences – particularly the question whether recall bias differs between male and female workers. Time use data from Africa show that women often carry out different roles and activities simultaneously, rather than sequentially. This holds particularly for childcare, which is typically embedded within other economic activities (Blackden and Wodon 2006). This may make it more difficult to recall farm labor for female than for male household workers.

In **Table 8** , we compare mean hours per person per plot between weekly visit and recall households for less educated households, more educated households, female workers, and male workers. Panel A shows that in less educated households, the average hours of farm labor are about 25 percent higher than in more educated households, and importantly there is no evidence of recall bias in the latter group. Recall households report, on average, 44.2 hours per person per plot more than weekly visit households among less educated households, whereas the difference is only 2.3 hours (and not statistically significant) among more educated households. Panel B summarizes hours per person per plot for male and female workers. Male farmers work almost 50 percent more hours per plot than female farmers, but contrary to our expectation the recall bias appears to be greater for males than for females.

**Table 8: Heterogeneity in recall bias, descriptive estimate**

|**A: By educatio**n|Weekly visit|Recall|Difference|Weekly visit|Recall|Difference|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||Hh educa|tion primary o|r below|Hh educ|ation above p|rimary|
|Season-wide hours per<br>person per plot|123.8|168.0|44.20***|96.1|98.3|2.27|
||(4.87)|(10.25)|(10.20)|(3.39)|(3.93)|(5.36)|
|Number of person-plots|1,037|658||1,750|1,017||
|**B: By gender**|Weekly visit|Recall|Difference|<sup>Weekly visit</sup>|Recall|Difference|
|||Male workers||Fe|male workers||
|Season-wide hours per<br>person per plot|126.49|151.94|25.45***|85.84|96.71|10.87*|
||(4.56)|(7.34)|(8.18)|(3.14)|(5.68)|(5.97)|
|Number ofperson-plots|1,410|880||1,337|795||

Note: Reported hours worked have been winsorized at the top 1 percent of the distribution. Standard errors are shown in parentheses. T-test on difference in means with *** indicating the difference is significant at the 1% level and * at the 10% level.

**Table 9** shows regression estimates of recall bias, controlling for baseline characteristics. For reference, column (1) repeats the main specification shown in **Table 3** , with a recall bias of 10.3 hours per person per plot. To test for heterogeneity in recall bias by level of education, in column (2), the regression includes an indicator variable that equals unity if at least one member of the household has attained education above the primary level ( _Hh education above primary_ ), and its interaction with the main recall variable ( _Recall*Above primary_ ). The results provide support for the education hypothesis. Both variables are negative and significant, confirming the descriptive evidence that more educated households report

> 11 We use the highest level of educational attainment in the household to split the sample into less educated (primary education or below) and more educated households.

16