Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 513

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Extent of Measurement Error in Longitudinal Earnings Data: Do Two Wrongs Make a Right?

Bound, John, Krueger, Alan B.·1991·Journal of Labor Economics
DOI 10.1086/298256
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article examines the properties and prevalence of measurement error in longitudinal earnings data. The analysis compares matched Current Population Survey data to administrative Social Security payroll tax records. In contrast to typically assumed properties of measurement error, the results indicate that errors are serially correlated over 2 years and negatively correlated with true earnings (i.e., mean reverting). In a cross section, the ratio of the variance of the signal to the total variance is .82 for men and .92 for women. These ratios fall to .65 and .81 when the data are specified in first differences. Longitudinal earnings data may be more reliable than previously believed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/298256

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 513

Metadata

Authors
Bound, J., & Krueger, A. B.
Venue
Journal of Labor Economics
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Published
1991-01
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
1-24
ISSN
  • 0734-306X (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5307
DOI
10.1086/298256
OpenAlex
W1987296535
Cited by
513
References
0
FWCI
9.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Extent of Measurement Error in Longitudinal Earnings Data: Do Two Wrongs Make a Right? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/298256
The paper
Bound, J., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). The Extent of Measurement Error in Longitudinal Earnings Data: Do Two Wrongs Make a Right? Journal of Labor Economics. https://doi.org/10.1086/298256

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.