Does Encouraging Record Use for Financial Assets 

Improve Data Accuracy? Evidence from 

Administrative Data

Jonathan Eggleston and Lori Reeder

U.S. Census Bureau

July 17th, 2018

1

This report is released to inform interested parties of ongoing research and to encourage discussion of work in 

progress. The views expressed on statistical issues are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. 

Census Bureau
Audience Question #1

• Raise your hand if you have any of the following types of 

bank accounts:

• Savings Account

• Interest-Earning Checking Account

• Money Market Account

• Certificate Of Deposit (CDs)

2
Audience Question #2

• Keep your hand raised if you know the answer to this 

question:

• How much interest income did you receive from your 

bank account between March 1st, 2018 and June 30th, 

2018?

3
Assets & Measurement Error 

• Problem: Many people are unaware of how much income 

they receive from their assets

• Problem could cause

• Inaccurate data

• Inaccurate measurement of income equality

4
Assets & Measurement Error 

• Potential solutions

• Conduct interviews around tax season

• Encourage respondents to consult financial records

5
Record Use

• Benefits of encouraging record use unclear

• Respondents who use records may already be aware of their 

finances

• Experimental studies (Couper et al. 2013, Murphy et al. 2015): No 

significant effect of record use on measurement error

6
Potential Limitations of Previous 

Experimental Studies

• Use indicators of measurement error, such as rounding, 

which may or may not be associated with actual 

measurement error

• Power Issues

• Small sample size

• Effect of experimental manipulation on record use was relatively 

small

• Our estimates: Power around 10% in these experimental studies

7
Our Study

• Compare survey to administrative data: More direct 

indicator of measurement error

• Novel estimation strategy: We use various measures of 

respondent motivation and precision to account for 

nonrandom selection

• Findings

• Record use associated with a 21 to 43 percent decrease in 

measurement error

• Record use increases interview length by 2.2%

8
Data

• Administrative Data: IRS 1040 Tax Returns

• Survey Data: 2014 Panel of the Survey of Income and Program Participation 

(Wave 1)

• Variables on income from assets

• Interest Income 

• Dividend Income 

• Gross Rental Income

• Sample Restrictions

• Matched to IRS 1040

• Positive (non-zero) asset income in both SIPP & IRS 1040

9
Key Explanatory Variables

• Main variable: Indicator of consulting records for asset 

questions

• 26% of respondents consulted records in 2014 SIPP (Wave 1)

• Issue: respondents who consult records may be more engaged 

respondents who give accurate data, even if they didn’t consult 

records

10
Key Explanatory Variables

• Novel Method: Proxy variables for overall data accuracy

• Respondent’s average time per question

• Respondent’s item nonresponse rate for financial questions

• Respondent’s average amount of rounding for financial questions

• Key assumption: Proxy variables account for all confounding 

factors that are correlated with both

• Measurement error in asset income 

• Record use

11
12

Inverse Hyperbolic Sine (IHS) of Absolute Difference 

in Asset Income ≈ log(abs(SIPP-IRS))

Interest Dividend Rental

Record Use ***-0.375 ***-0.246 ***-0.518 ***-0.353 ***-0.763 **-0.558

(0.049) (0.053) (0.103) (0.105) (0.262) (0.274)

Time Per Question -0.006 -0.006 -0.003

(0.005) (0.009) (0.016)

Item Nonresponse 0.096 0.102 -0.050

Rate (0.115) (0.199) (0.550)

Rounding Average ***.950 ***1.072 ***2.259

(0.138) (0.251) (0.809)

Proxy Variables No Yes No Yes No Yes

N. Obs. (Rounded) 7500 7500 2900 2900 1300 1300

Source: 2014 SIPP panel and 2013 IRS 1040 dataset
13

Inverse Hyperbolic Sine (IHS) of Absolute Difference 

in Asset Income ≈ log(abs(SIPP-IRS))

Interest Dividend Rental

Record Use ***-0.375 ***-0.246 ***-0.518 ***-0.353 ***-0.763 **-0.558

(0.049) (0.053) (0.103) (0.105) (0.262) (0.274)

Proxy Variables No Yes No Yes No Yes

Interest income: 

21.8% decrease in measurement 

error

Rental income: 

42.8% decrease in 

measurement error

Transformation: 

Percent decrease = e^(-0.246)-1 = 0.218
14

Inverse Hyperbolic Sine (IHS) of Absolute Difference 

in Asset Income ≈ log(abs(SIPP-IRS))

Interest Dividend Rental

Rounding Average ***.950 ***1.072 ***2.259

(0.138) (0.251) (0.809)

Proxy Variables No Yes No Yes No Yes

N. Obs. (Rounded) 7500 7500 2900 2900 1300 1300

Source: 2014 SIPP panel and 2013 IRS 1040 dataset

1% increase in average amount of 

rounding associated with a 0.95% 

increase in measurement error.
Cost of Record Use

• Previous results: Potential benefit on data accuracy 

• Cost: Record users may spend more time per question

• Increase in respondent burden

• Monetary cost for interviewer time

• Question: Does record use increase interview time, after 

controlling for other respondent characteristics?

• Our contribution: First to control for confounding factors in a 

regression framework

15
Regression for Seconds Spent Per Question 

for the Asset Income and Value Section

16

Seconds Per Question 

Record Use ***3.499

(0.100)

Time Per Question in ***0.580

Other Sections (Seconds) (0.014)

Interviewer's Time Per Question in ***0.310

Other Sections (Seconds) (0.017)

Item Nonresponse Rate ***-3.196

(0.190)

Rounding Average ***-4.670

(0.195)

N. Observations (Rounded) 48,500

Source: 2014 SIPP panel 
Regression for Seconds Spent Per Question 

for the Asset Income and Value Section

17

Seconds Per Question 

Record Use ***3.499

(0.100)

Record users 

spend an extra 

3.5 seconds per 

asset question
Regression for Seconds Spent Per Question 

for the Asset Income and Value Section

18

Seconds Per Question 

Record Use ***3.499

(0.100)

Record users 

spend an extra 

3.5 seconds per 

asset question

• Average number of asset value & income 

questions: 16.02

• Average length of personal interview: 

41.65 minutes

• Records users spend an extra 0.93 

minutes in the asset section

• Record use increases interview 

length by 2.2%
Conclusion

• Our Study: First large scale comparison of survey to 

administrative data to determine whether record use is 

associated with improved data quality

• Record use associated with an 21 to 43 percent decrease in 

measurement error

• Record use associated with spending an extra 3.5 seconds 

on each asset question

• Record use increases interview length by 2.2%

19
20

Jonathan Eggleston

Economist

Labor Force Statistics Branch

Social, Economic, and Housing 

Statistics Division

U.S. Census Bureau

Office: 301.763.2357 

jonathan.s.eggleston

@census.gov

Lori Reeder

Survey Statistician 

Survey Improvement Research Branch

Social, Economic, and Housing 

Statistics Division

U.S. Census Bureau

Office: 301.763.9787

lori.beth.reeder@census.gov

Contact Information