IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/nbr/nberch/15021.html

Synthetic Data and Social Science Research: Accuracy Assessments and Practical Considerations from the SIPP Synthetic Beta

In: Data Privacy Protection and the Conduct of Applied Research: Methods, Approaches and New Findings

Author

Listed:
  • Jordan C. Stanley
  • Evan S. Totty

Abstract

Statistical agencies have a dual mandate to provide accurate data and protect the privacy and confidentiality of data subjects. These mandates are fundamentally at odds and therefore must be balanced: more accurate data reduces privacy, while privacy protections introduce error that reduces accuracy. Balancing accuracy and privacy requires, among other things, that we can quantify accuracy and privacy. Quantifying privacy has become easier thanks to differential privacy. Quantifying accuracy may sound easy by comparison, but there are many challenges to doing this effectively. In this paper, we first discuss some challenges associated with quantifying data accuracy. We then focus on an often-ignored challenge, which is the existence of survey error in the data being protected. We provide an overview of how privacy protection error relates to total survey error. We also summarize recent work that uses validation data to quantify the impact of privacy protection error relative to and conditional on other sources of survey error. Finally, we discuss opportunities and challenges for future work on data privacy and survey error.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Jordan C. Stanley & Evan S. Totty, 2026. "Synthetic Data and Social Science Research: Accuracy Assessments and Practical Considerations from the SIPP Synthetic Beta," NBER Chapters, in: Data Privacy Protection and the Conduct of Applied Research: Methods, Approaches and New Findings, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:15021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c15021.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Celhay, Pablo & Meyer, Bruce D. & Mittag, Nikolas, 2024. "What leads to measurement errors? Evidence from reports of program participation in three surveys," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 238(2).
    2. Abel Brodeur & Scott Carrell & David Figlio & Lester Lusher, 2023. "Unpacking P-hacking and Publication Bias," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(11), pages 2974-3002, November.
    3. Susanne M. Schennach, 2016. "Recent Advances in the Measurement Error Literature," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 341-377, October.
    4. Steven Ruggles & Catherine Fitch & Diana Magnuson & Jonathan Schroeder, 2019. "Differential Privacy and Census Data: Implications for Social and Economic Research," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 109, pages 403-408, May.
    5. Abel Brodeur & Nikolai Cook & Anthony Heyes, 2020. "Methods Matter: p-Hacking and Publication Bias in Causal Analysis in Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(11), pages 3634-3660, November.
    6. Drechsler, Jörg & Reiter, Jerome P., 2011. "An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(12), pages 3232-3243, December.
    7. Katharine G. Abraham, 2019. "Reconciling Data Access and Privacy: Building a Sustainable Model for the Future," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 109, pages 409-413, May.
    8. Paul Bingley & Alessandro Martinello, 2017. "Measurement Error in Income and Schooling and the Bias of Linear Estimators," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(4), pages 1117-1148.
    9. Charles F. Manski, 2015. "Communicating Uncertainty in Official Economic Statistics: An Appraisal Fifty Years after Morgenstern," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(3), pages 631-653, September.
    10. Meyer, Bruce D. & Mittag, Nikolas, 2021. "An empirical total survey error decomposition using data combination," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 224(2), pages 286-305.
    11. Joshua Snoke & Gillian M. Raab & Beata Nowok & Chris Dibben & Aleksandra Slavkovic, 2018. "General and specific utility measures for synthetic data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 181(3), pages 663-688, June.
    12. John M. Abowd & Ian M. Schmutte, 2019. "An Economic Analysis of Privacy Protection and Statistical Accuracy as Social Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(1), pages 171-202, January.
    13. Ron S. Jarmin, 2019. "Evolving Measurement for an Evolving Economy: Thoughts on 21st Century US Economic Statistics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 165-184, Winter.
    14. Abel Brodeur & Mathias Lé & Marc Sangnier & Yanos Zylberberg, 2016. "Star Wars: The Empirics Strike Back," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 1-32, January.
    15. Tommasi, Denni & Zhang, Lina, 2024. "Bounding program benefits when participation is misreported," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 238(1).
    16. Crossley, Thomas F. & Fisher, Paul & Hussein, Omar, 2023. "Assessing data from summary questions about earnings and income," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    17. Ori Heffetz & Katrina Ligett, 2014. "Privacy and Data-Based Research," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
    18. Jenkins, Stephen P. & Rios-Avila, Fernando, 2021. "Reconciling Reports: Modelling Employment Earnings and Measurement Errors Using Linked Survey and Administrative Data," IZA Discussion Papers 14405, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Lucas C. Coffman & Muriel Niederle, 2015. "Pre-analysis Plans Have Limited Upside, Especially Where Replications Are Feasible," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 81-98, Summer.
    20. Thibaut Arpinon & Romain Espinosa, 2023. "A practical guide to Registered Reports for economists," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(1), pages 90-122, June.
    21. Thibaut Arpinon & Romain Espinosa, 2023. "A Practical Guide to Registered Reports for Economists," Post-Print halshs-03897719, HAL.
    22. Bruce D. Meyer & Nikolas Mittag & Robert M. Goerge, 2022. "Errors in Survey Reporting and Imputation and Their Effects on Estimates of Food Stamp Program Participation," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(5), pages 1605-1644.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna Dreber & Magnus Johannesson & Yifan Yang, 2024. "Selective reporting of placebo tests in top economics journals," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(3), pages 921-932, July.
    2. Thibaut Arpinon & Marianne Lefebvre, 2024. "Registered Reports and Associated Benefits for Agricultural Economics," Post-Print hal-04635986, HAL.
    3. Ha Trong Nguyen & Huong Thu Le & Luke Connelly & Francis Mitrou, 2023. "Accuracy of self‐reported private health insurance coverage," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(12), pages 2709-2729, December.
    4. Balafoutas, Loukas & Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Umashev, Nicholas, 2025. "Incentives and the replication crisis in social sciences: A critical review of open science practices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    5. John M. Abowd & Ian M. Schmutte & William Sexton & Lars Vilhuber, 2019. "Suboptimal Provision of Privacy and Statistical Accuracy When They are Public Goods," Papers 1906.09353, arXiv.org.
    6. Ferman, Bruno & Finamor, Lucas, 2025. "There must be an error here! Experimental evidence on coding errors' biases," I4R Discussion Paper Series 266, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    7. Costanza Naguib, 2025. "Does single-blind review encourage or discourage p-hacking?," Diskussionsschriften dp2504, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    8. Deer, Lachlan & Adler, Susanne J. & Datta, Hannes & Mizik, Natalie & Sarstedt, Marko, 2025. "Toward open science in marketing research," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 212-233.
    9. Bobasu, Alina & Ciccarelli, Matteo & Notarpietro, Alessandro & Ambrocio, Gene & Auer, Simone & Bonfim, Diana & Bottero, Margherita & Brázdik, František & Buss, Ginters & Byrne, David & Casalis, André , 2025. "Monetary policy transmission: a reference guide through ESCB models and empirical benchmarks," Occasional Paper Series 377, European Central Bank.
    10. Bruns, Stephan B. & Doucouliagos, Anthony & Doucouliagos, Chris & König, Johannes & Stanley, T. D. & Zigova, Katarina, 2025. "The Delayed Acceptance of Female Research in Economics," IZA Discussion Papers 17649, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Binswanger, Johannes & Oechslin, Manuel, 2020. "Better statistics, better economic policies?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    12. Abel Brodeur & Nikolai M. Cook & Jonathan S. Hartley & Anthony Heyes, 2024. "Do Preregistration and Preanalysis Plans Reduce p-Hacking and Publication Bias? Evidence from 15,992 Test Statistics and Suggestions for Improvement," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(3), pages 527-561.
    13. Michler, Jeffrey D. & Josephson, Anna & Kilic, Talip & Murray, Siobhan, 2022. "Privacy protection, measurement error, and the integration of remote sensing and socioeconomic survey data," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    14. Tullio, Federico, 2025. "Dynamics and measurement error in household income data collected with single questions," MPRA Paper 124151, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Enzinger, Matthias & Gechert, Sebastian & Heimberger, Philipp & Prante, Franz & Romero, Daniel F., 2025. "The overstated effects of conventional monetary policy on output and prices," I4R Discussion Paper Series 264, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    16. Ali Elminejad & Tomas Havranek & Roman Horvath & Zuzana Irsova, 2023. "Intertemporal Substitution in Labor Supply: A Meta-Analysis," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 51, pages 1095-1113, December.
    17. Sebastian Gechert & Bianka Mey & Matej Opatrny & Tomas Havranek & T. D. Stanley & Pedro R. D. Bom & Hristos Doucouliagos & Philipp Heimberger & Zuzana Irsova & Heiko J. Rachinger, 2025. "Conventional wisdom, meta‐analysis, and research revision in economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 980-999, July.
    18. Sarah A. Janzen & Jeffrey D. Michler, 2021. "Ulysses' pact or Ulysses' raft: Using pre‐analysis plans in experimental and nonexperimental research," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1286-1304, December.
    19. Costanza Naguib, 2024. "P-hacking and Significance Stars," Diskussionsschriften dp2409, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    20. Garret Christensen & Edward Miguel, 2018. "Transparency, Reproducibility, and the Credibility of Economics Research," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 920-980, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • J10 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:15021. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.