Overview of the

Consumer Expenditure Survey

Research Agenda

Adam Safir & Lindsay Jilk

Research and Program Development

Consumer Expenditure Survey

July 14, 2015
Outline

1. Ongoing Survey Improvements

2. Research Agenda

3. Research Highlights (2013-15)

4. Redesign Challenges

2
1. Ongoing Improvements

 2003 – CAPI (CEQ)

 2004 – CAPI (CED) demographics and income

 2004 – Income imputation

 2005 – Contact History Instrument (CHI)

 2005 – User friendly diary form

 2005 – Diary keying and auto-coding system

 2009 – Telephone thresholds (CEQ)

 2013 – Federal and state tax estimation

 2015 – Bounding interview elimination

 Ongoing – Biennial CEQ instrument revisions

3
2. Research Agenda

CE Redesign Elements

 Reduce error (in particular, underreporting)

 Reduce burden (“secondary” objective)

 Keep costs neutral (find cost savings)

 Monitor redesign results (verify effectiveness)

4

Research Agenda

Gemini Project Plan Related CE Research
3. Research Highlights

Redesign 

Elements Research Projects

Reduce Error

Admin Data *

Proxy Knowledge (2013 CEQ Research Section)

Proxy Reporting Lab Study 

Landmark Event Questions (2012 CEQ Research Section) 

FR Assessment of Respondent Effort (2012 CEQ Research Section)

Respondent Use of Financial Software/Websites (2012 CEQ Research Section) 

CEQ Worksheet 

Predicting Panel Survey Response from Wave 1 Doorstep Concerns

CE CHI Text Analysis Project 

Reduce Burden

Respondent Burden Questions (2012 CEQ Research Section)

2015 FR Survey *

Cost Neutral

Optimal Contact Attempts Verification

Bounding Interview Elimination

Monitor Results Data Quality Profile Prototype and Initial Requirements *

CE Measurement Error Study

5
Reduce Error: Measurement

 Auxiliary Data Sources

New method with potential to inform about 

measurement error properties of CE estimates, 

supplement respondent-collected data, and reduce 

data collection and processing costs (McBride et al. 

2015)

Current project: Linking auxiliary housing data to CEQ 

records and comparing results to determine quality of 

CEQ estimates

But a data source preference question (in CEQ 

Research Section) found that respondents preferred 

being personally surveyed regarding their 

expenditures, over data linkage

6
 Proxy Knowledge (CEQ Research Section)

Respondents who reported being “very knowledgeable” 

of other consumer unit member expenditures showed 

an increase in total reported expenditures compared to 

those reporting less proxy knowledge (McBride et al. 

2015)

 Proxy Reporting Lab Study

Resulted in recommendations for the design of future 

proxy protocols (Yu 2013)

7

Reduce Error: Measurement
 Respondent Use of Financial 

Software/Websites (CEQ Research Section)

Associated with significantly higher expenditures and 

greater record use (McBride et al. 2015)

 Landmark Event Questions 

(CEQ Research Section) 

Few respondents reported landmark events (McBride 

et al. 2013); unclear if questions prompted reports of 

expenditures that might have otherwise been missed

8

Reduce Error: Measurement
Reduce Error: Measurement

 CEQ Worksheet

Since CEQ respondents are asked to recall expenses 

from a 3-month period, it may be helpful to provide 

them with a worksheet to use during those months 

(To 2014) 

First stage focused on gathering FR input

9
Reduce Error: Nonresponse 

 Predicting Panel Survey Response from 

Wave 1 CHI Doorstep Concerns

Reporting quality in final wave found to be 

differentiable by initial respondent concerns (Kopp et 

al. 2013)

Initial respondent concerns are also associated with 

likelihood of nonresponse (McBride & Tan 2014)

10
Reduce Error: Nonresponse 

 CE CHI Text Analysis Project 

Three additional themes consistently emerged from the 

refusal note field: privacy, anti-government, and 

voluntary nature of the survey (Martinez & Tan 2015)

 Connection found between the CHI doorstep concern 

items and the reasons for non-interview captured in 

the ‘Other- specify’ field of the CAPI instrument

11
Reduce Burden

 Respondent Burden Questions 

(CEQ Research Section) 

Interview length and quantity of interviews identified 

as the most burdensome dimensions (McBride et al. 

2015)

Perceived burden linked to external indicators, such as 

interview length

Survey effort lower in respondents who reported high 

burden; this was partially mediated by disinclination to 

participate in the survey, such that pre-interview 

reluctance may be a component of later perceptions of 

burden irrespective of effort

12
Cost Neutral 

 Optimal Contact Attempts Verification

From a total survey error perspective, seven contact 

attempts was identified as an optimal threshold (Safir 

& Tan 2015)

 Bounding Interview Elimination 

Eliminating the bounding interview can reduce data 

collection costs without adversely affecting data quality 

(Elkin 2013) 

13
Monitor Redesign Results

 Data Quality Profile

A consistent, well-defined set of metrics can be used to 

establish baselines for monitoring trends in the quality 

of routine survey production activities over time 

(Fricker & Tan, 2012)

These metrics also can be drawn upon to evaluate the 

impact of survey design options under consideration, 

as well as external interventions that affect the survey

Will be available to external users, making data quality 

assessment more transparent 

14
Monitor Redesign Results

 CE Measurement Error Study 

Analyzed differences in measurement error over time 

due to design changes (Meekins 2014)

Recommended metrics to be used in the ongoing Data 

Quality Profile Project to monitor and evaluate 

measurement error 

15
4. Redesign Research Challenges

 Timing of ancillary research findings, 

synthesizing results into major in-progress 

redesign testing & implementation

Proof of concept test, large scale feasibility test, etc.

 Budget for research, testing, evaluation, and 

implementation

 Sample size requirements

 Pace of technological change

 Limitations of emergent technologies 

16
References

17

Reduce Error 

Admin Data 

 Using Alternative Data Record Linkage to Enhance CE Data Quality: Scope of Work 

McBride, B., L. Erhard, B. Passero, and R. Schwartz (2015) 

Proxy Knowledge (CEQ Research Section) 

 2013 Research Section Analysis Final Report 

McBride, B, N. To, and E. Yu (2015) 

Proxy Reporting Lab Study 

 Asking Questions about Household Member Activities to Improve Expenditure Reporting 

Yu, E. (2013) 

Landmark Event Questions (CEQ Research Section) 

 2012 Research Section Analysis Final Report 

McBride, B., E. Yu, M. Slomka, L. Erhard, and J. Davis (2013) 
References

18

Reduce Error

FR Assessment of Respondent Effort (CEQ Research Section)

 2012 Research Section Analysis Final Report

McBride, B., E. Yu, M. Slomka, L. Erhard, and J. Davis (2013)

Respondent Use of Financial Software/Websites 

 2012 Research Section Analysis Final Report

McBride, B., E. Yu, M. Slomka, L. Erhard, and J. Davis (2013)

CEQ Worksheet

 CEQ Worksheet Phase 1 Final Report 

To, N. (2014)

Predicting Panel Survey Response from Wave 1 Doorstep Concerns 

 An Exploratory Study on the Association of Doorstop Concerns with Three Survey Quality 

Measures for the CE Interview Survey

Kopp, B., B. McBride, and L. Tan (2013)

 Quantifying CHI Doorstop Concerns as Risk Factors of Wave 1 Nonresponse for the CE 

Interview Survey 

McBride, B., and L. Tan (2014)
References

19

Reduce Error 

CE CHI Text Analysis Project 

 An Exploratory Text Analysis Project for the Consumer Expenditure Interview Survey 

Martinez, W., and L. Tan (2015) 

Burden 

Respondent Burden Questions (CEQ Research Section) 

 2013 Research Section Analysis Final Report 

McBride, B, N. To, and E. Yu (2015) 

Cost Neutral 

Optimal Contact Attempts Verification 

 Verification of an Optimal Contact Attempt Threshold for the Consumer Expenditure 

Interview Survey 

Safir, A., and L. Tan (2015) 
References

20

Cost Neutral

Bounding Interview Elimination 

 Recommendation Regarding the Use of a CE Bounding Interview 

Elkin, I. (2013)

Monitor Redesign Results

Data Quality Profile 

 A Proposal for a Preliminary Framework for Monitoring and Reporting on Data Quality for 

the Consumer Expenditure Survey 

Fricker, S., and L. Tan (2012)

CE Measurement Error Study 

 Longitudinal Assessment of Measurement Error on the Consumer Expenditure Interview 

Survey: 1996 – 2010

Meekins, B. (2014)
Contact Information

Adam Safir

safir.adam@bls.gov

21