IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/cpaper/2014-08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Nature of the Bias When Studying Only Linkable Person Records: Evidence from the American Community Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Brittany Bond
  • J. David Brown
  • Adela Luque
  • Amy O’Hara

Abstract

Record linkage across survey and administrative records sources can greatly enrich data and improve their quality. The linkage can reduce respondent burden and nonresponse follow-up costs. This is particularly important in an era of declining survey response rates and tight budgets. Record linkage also creates statistical bias, however. The U.S. Census Bureau links person records through its Person Identification Validation System (PVS), assigning each record a Protected Identification Key (PIK). It is not possible to reliably assign a PIK to every record, either due to insufficient identifying information or because the information does not uniquely match any of the administrative records used in the person validation process. Non-random ability to assign a PIK can potentially inject bias into statistics using linked data. This paper studies the nature of this bias using the 2009 and 2010 American Community Survey (ACS). The ACS is well-suited for this analysis, as it contains a rich set of person characteristics that can describe the bias. We estimate probit models for whether a record is assigned a PIK. The results suggest that young children, minorities, residents of group quarters, immigrants, recent movers, low-income individuals, and non-employed individuals are less likely to receive a PIK using 2009 ACS. Changes to the PVS process in 2010 significantly addressed the young children deficit, attenuated the other biases, and increased the validated records share from 88.1 to 92.6 percent (person-weighted).

Suggested Citation

  • Brittany Bond & J. David Brown & Adela Luque & Amy O’Hara, 2014. "The Nature of the Bias When Studying Only Linkable Person Records: Evidence from the American Community Survey," CARRA Working Papers 2014-08, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
  • Handle: RePEc:cen:cpaper:2014-08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2014/adrm/carra-wp-2014-08.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2014
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Meyer & Robert Goerge, 2011. "Errors in Survey Reporting and Imputation and Their Effects on Estimates of Food Stamp Program Participation," Working Papers 11-14, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    2. Meyer, Bruce D. & Goerge, Robert M., 2011. "Errors in Survey Reporting and Imputation and Their Effects on Estimates of Food Stamp Program Participation," Contractor and Cooperator Reports 312394, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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. Benjamin Cerf Harris, 2014. "Within and Across County Variation in SNAP Misreporting: Evidence from Linked ACS and Administrative Records," CARRA Working Papers 2014-05, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    2. Zachary H. Seeskin, 2016. "Evaluating the Use of Commercial Data to Improve Survey Estimates of Property Taxes," CARRA Working Papers 2016-06, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    3. Erik Scherpf & Benjamin Cerf, 2019. "Local Labor Demand and Program Participation Dynamics: Evidence from New York SNAP Administrative Records," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 394-425, March.
    4. Hudak, Katelin M. & Racine, Elizabeth F., 2021. "Do additional SNAP benefits matter for child weight?: Evidence from the 2009 benefit increase," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    5. Lorenzo Almada & Ian McCarthy & Rusty Tchernis, 2016. "What Can We Learn about the Effects of Food Stamps on Obesity in the Presence of Misreporting?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(4), pages 997-1017.
    6. Fayaz Farkhad, Bita & Meyerhoefer, Chad D. & Dearden, James A., "undated". "The within-month pattern of medical utilization among SNAP participants," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258361, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Scherpf, Erik, 2013. "The Path to SNAP: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Dynamics Among Young Adults," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150349, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. MacEwan, Joanna P. & Smith, Aaron & Alston, Julian M., 2016. "The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, energy balance, and weight gain," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 103-120.
    9. John L. Czajka & Karen Cunnyngham & Randy Rosso, "undated". "Simulated Versus Actual SNAP Unit Composition in Survey Households in Two States," Mathematica Policy Research Reports e5c1079d08424fb195d0b5262, Mathematica Policy Research.
    10. Nguimkeu, Pierre & Denteh, Augustine & Tchernis, Rusty, 2019. "On the estimation of treatment effects with endogenous misreporting," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 208(2), pages 487-506.
    11. repec:osf:osfxxx:jaufh_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Heflin, Colleen M. & Mueser, Peter R., 2013. "Aid to Jobless Workers in Florida in the Face of the Great Recession: The Interaction of Unemployment Insurance and the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program," IZA Discussion Papers 7772, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Coleman-Jensen, Alisha & Rabbitt, Matthew & Gregory, Christian & Singh, Anita, . "Household Food Security in the United States in 2021," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 2022(Economic ).
    14. Coleman-Jensen, Alisha & Rabbitt, Matthew P. & Gregory, Christian A. & Singh, Anita, 2020. "Household Food Security in the United States in 2019," Agricultural Economic Reports 305691, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    15. Cancian, Maria & Han, Eunhee & Noyes, Jennifer L., 2014. "From multiple program participation to disconnection: Changing trajectories of TANF and SNAP beneficiaries in Wisconsin," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 91-102.
    16. Coleman-Jensen, Alisha & Rabbitt, Matthew & Gregory, Christian & Singh, Anita, 2022. "Household Food Security in the United States in 2021," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 2022(Economic ), September.
    17. Johnson, Anna D. & Herbst, Chris M., 2013. "Can we trust parental reports of child care subsidy receipt?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 984-993.
    18. Kyung Min Kang & Robert A. Moffitt, 2019. "The Effect of SNAP and School Food Programs on Food Security, Diet Quality, and Food Spending: Sensitivity to Program Reporting Error," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(1), pages 156-201, July.
    19. Tiehen, Laura & Jolliffe, Dean & Gundersen, Craig, "undated". "Alleviating Poverty in the United States: The Critical Role of SNAP Benefits," Economic Research Report 262233, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    20. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Riphahn, Regina T. & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2019. "Benefit underreporting in survey data and its consequences for measuring non-take-up: new evidence from linked administrative and survey data," IAB-Discussion Paper 201906, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    21. Rabbitt, Matthew P. & Reed-Jones, Madeline & Hales, Laura J. & Burke, Michael P., 2024. "Household Food Security in the United States in 2023," Economic Research Report 344963, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cen:cpaper:2014-08. 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: Dawn Anderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.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.