Use of Financial Records in the 

CE Survey

Brandon Kopp

Research Psychologist

Office of Survey Methods Research

CE Methods Symposium

July 16th, 2013

 

CE Records Study

 Goals

What records are available and from whom?

How do participants’ self-reports compare to 

those records?

 Methods

115 participants from North Carolina and DC

2 visits, 1 week apart

– Visit 1 – Shortened CEQ interview (9 Sections)

– Visit 2 – Comparison of financial records to selfreports
 

CE Records Study

What records are available and from whom?

 Records were provided for 36% of the 

3,039 expenditures reported in Visit 1

 Participant characteristics positively 

associated with having records: 

 Expenditure characteristics positively 

associated with having records:

 Non-Hispanic Whites  Women

 DC Residents  Home Owners

 Recent Purchases  More Expensive 

Purchases
 

CE Records Study

How do participants’ self-reports compare to those records?

 Over- and Under- reporting were not common

 81 items (3%) on records but not reported in Visit 1

 34 items (1%) reported erroneously in Visit 1

 Participants’ accuracy in reporting expenditure 

amounts was low

 Matched record exactly - 30%

– Within 5 or 10% of correct amount - 53%

 Over the correct amount - 33%

 Under the correct amount - 37%

 On average, participants were off by 36%

 Over- and Under- estimation tended to cancel each 

other out
How much better are records than 

self-reports?

In this sample, much more accurate

How useful are records in actual 

practice?
Tin Box

• Ask respondents to gather 

their records

• Prospectively

• Retrospectively

• Provide those records to 

interviewer for scanning/data 

entry
Tin Box

Date Item Description Price

12/22/10 BABY PLD CARR Fresh Vegetables 1.50

12/22/10 CELERY 30 CT Fresh Vegetables 1.99

12/22/10 GREEN CABBAGE Fresh Vegetables 2.80

12/14/12 XFINITY Internet Cable, Satellite, and 

Internet Services 55.95

?
 

Types of Financial Records

• Point-of-Purchase Receipts

• Bills

• Website Printouts

• E-mail Receipts

• Bank Statements

• Credit Card Statements

• Written Notes

• Financial Software Printouts

• Package Invoices

• Service Invoices
 

Records Information and 

Feasibility of Use (RIFU) Study

 Goals

What information necessary for completing the 

CE surveys is available on financial records?

What additional information can be collected from 

records?

 Methods

152 participants from the Chicago area

2 visits, 2 weeks apart

– Visit 1 – Explain record collection task

– Visit 2 – Scan records, questions about the interview 

experience

Enter data from records into database
 

RIFU Study

 2,985 records were provided

Average: 19.6/household

Range: 0 – 232 records/household

86.3% or records were receipts, only 0.8% were 

bills

 9,903 items contained on the records

Average: 3.9 items/record

Range: 1 – 133 items/record

69.5% of items were classified as food purchases, 

9.3% as housing, 4.4% as apparel
Transaction Date

• Present on 98.3% of 

collected records
Item Description

• Coders attempted to fit item descriptions 

into a 4-tier, 72 category scheme 

• A subset of items were double-coded for 

reliability purposes

Fully Coded 90.1%

Within 1 tier of full 0.6%

Within 2 tiers of full 2.3%

Within 3 tiers of full 1.2%

Not Coded 5.8%

Full Match 69.3%

Mismatch (same top category) 22.4%

Unmatched 8.3%

1 Food

2 Food at Home

3 Meats, Poultry, Fish, Eggs

4 Poultry

1 Personal Care Products and Services
Item Price

• Present on collected records

Item Price 99.3%

Total Price 98.3%

Tax (Amount Paid) 64.9%

Tax Rate 29.4%

Shipping Cost 0.1%
Outlet Information

Outlet Name 89.3%

Outlet Address 88.6%

Outlet Phone Number 84.6%

• Present on collected records
Personally Identifiable Information 

(PII)

• Present on collected records

Respondent Name 9.1%

Respondent Address 2.7%

Respondent Phone Number 1.4%

Credit Card Number (Full) 0.3%

Credit Card Number (Last 4) 41.4%

Customer ID 10.9%

Name

Address

Name

Address

Customer ID #

Customer ID #
 

Information Not on Records

 Food and Drinks Away From Home

Meal (breakfast, lunch, dinner, snack/other)

Outlet Type (fast food, full service)

 Food and Drinks for Home Consumption

Packaging (fresh, frozen, bottled/canned, other)

 Clothing, Shoes, Jewelry, and Accessories

Gender 

Age
 

Conclusions

 Comparison of self-reports and records 

revealed some over/under reporting 

and extensive over/under estimation

 Collecting records for all household 

expenses is difficult

 Records, by themselves, provide a lot, 

but not all, of the information CE needs; 

respondent interaction is still needed
 

Future Challenges

 Collecting a comprehensive set of 

records

Collecting more online/digital records

 Capturing transactions that do not yield 

records

 Easily and accurately converting records 

into tabular data ?
 

Special Thanks

 CE Records Study Team

At BLS:

– Neil Tseng

– Janel Brattland

– Jeanette Davis

At Census:

– Chris Stringer

– Richard Schwartz

At RTI:

– Emily Geisen

– Charles Lau

– Ashley Richards

– Joan Wang

 RIFU Study Team

At BLS:

– Nhien To

– Lucilla Tan

– Jennifer Edgar

– Jeanette Davis

At NORC:

– Lisa Lee

– Micah Sjoblom
Contact Information

Brandon Kopp

Research Psychologist

Office of Survey Methods Research

www.bls.gov/osmr

202-691-7514

kopp.brandon@bls.gov