IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_11911.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Social Desirability Atlas

Author

Listed:
  • Leonardo Bursztyn
  • Ingar Haaland
  • Nicolas Röver
  • Christopher Roth
  • Ingar K. Haaland

Abstract

Social desirability bias (SDB) is a pervasive threat to the validity of survey and experimental data. Respondents might often misreport sensitive attitudes and behaviors to appear more socially acceptable. We begin by synthesizing empirical evidence on the prevalence and magnitude of SDB across various domains, focusing on studies with individual-level bench marks. We then critically assess commonly used strategies to mitigate SDB, highlighting how they can sometimes fail by creating confusion or inadvertently increasing perceived sensitivity. To help researchers navigate these challenges, we offer practical guidance on selecting the most suitable tools for different research contexts. Finally, we examine how SDB can distort treatment effects in experiments and discuss mitigation strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonardo Bursztyn & Ingar Haaland & Nicolas Röver & Christopher Roth & Ingar K. Haaland, 2025. "The Social Desirability Atlas," CESifo Working Paper Series 11911, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_11911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp11911.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    --->

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hunt Allcott & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2015. "Evaluating Behaviorally Motivated Policy: Experimental Evidence from the Lightbulb Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(8), pages 2501-2538, August.
    2. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "How to Run Surveys: A Guide to Creating Your Own Identifying Variation and Revealing the Invisible," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 15(1), pages 205-234, September.
    3. Alexis Grigorieff & Christopher Roth & Diego Ubfal, 2020. "Does Information Change Attitudes Toward Immigrants?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(3), pages 1117-1143, June.
    4. Felix Chopra & Ingar Haaland, 2023. "Conducting qualitative interviews with AI," CEBI working paper series 23-06, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    5. Alem, Yonas & Eggert, Håkan & Kocher, Martin G. & Ruhinduka, Remidius D., 2018. "Why (field) experiments on unethical behavior are important: Comparing stated and revealed behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 71-85.
    6. Katherine B. Coffman & Lucas C. Coffman & Keith M. Marzilli Ericson, 2017. "The Size of the LGBT Population and the Magnitude of Antigay Sentiment Are Substantially Underestimated," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(10), pages 3168-3186, October.
    7. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Stefanie Stantcheva & Johannes Wohlfart, 2025. "Understanding Economic Behavior Using Open-Ended Survey Data," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 362, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    8. Marc Höglinger & Ben Jann, 2018. "More is not always better: An experimental individual-level validation of the randomized response technique and the crosswise model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, August.
    9. Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2020. "Labor market concerns and support for immigration," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. Chuang, Erica & Dupas, Pascaline & Huillery, Elise & Seban, Juliette, 2021. "Sex, lies, and measurement: Consistency tests for indirect response survey methods," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    11. Harrison, Glenn W. & Martínez-Correa, Jimmy & Swarthout, J. Todd & Ulm, Eric R., 2017. "Scoring rules for subjective probability distributions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 430-448.
    12. Sendhil Mullainathan & Marianne Bertrand, 2001. "Do People Mean What They Say? Implications for Subjective Survey Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 67-72, May.
    13. Chuang, Erica & Dupas, Pascaline & Huillery, Elise & Seban, Juliette, 2021. "Sex, lies, and measurement: Consistency tests for indirect response survey methods," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    14. Anatol-Fiete Näher & Ivar Krumpal, 2012. "Asking sensitive questions: the impact of forgiving wording and question context on social desirability bias," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1601-1616, August.
    15. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    16. Reisinger, James, 2022. "Subjective well-being and social desirability," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    17. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    18. Loewenstein, George, 1999. "Experimental Economics from the Vantage-Point of Behavioural Economics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 23-34, February.
    19. Jun-Wu Yu & Guo-Liang Tian & Man-Lai Tang, 2008. "Two new models for survey sampling with sensitive characteristic: design and analysis," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 251-263, April.
    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. Leonardo Bursztyn & Ingar Haaland & Nicolas Röver & Christopher Roth, 2025. "The Social Desirability Atlas," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 365, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    2. Lergetporer, Philipp & Piopiunik, Marc & Simon, Lisa, 2021. "Does the education level of refugees affect natives’ attitudes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Cattaneo, Cristina & Grieco, Daniela, 2021. "Turning opposition into support to immigration: The role of narratives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 785-801.
    4. Burgstaller, Lilith & Feld, Lars P. & Pfeil, Katharina, 2022. "Working in the shadow: Survey techniques for measuring and explaining undeclared work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 661-671.
    5. Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2020. "Educational inequality and public policy preferences: Evidence from representative survey experiments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Ivar Krumpal & Thomas Voss, 2020. "Sensitive Questions and Trust: Explaining Respondents’ Behavior in Randomized Response Surveys," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    7. Olivia Bertelli & Thomas Calvo & Emmanuelle Lavallée & Marion Mercier & Sandrine Mesplé-Somps, 2023. "Measuring insecurity-related experiences and preferences in a fragile State. A list experiment in Mali," Working Papers DT/2023/01, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    8. Leng, Alyssa Amanda & Edwards, Ryan Barclay & Wood, Terence, 2025. "Narratives, immigration and immigration policy preferences," SocArXiv c63uq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    9. David Sungho Park & Shilpa Aggarwal & Dahyeon Jeong & Naresh Kumar & Jonathan Robinson & Alan Spearot, 2021. "Private but Misunderstood? Evidence on Measuring Intimate Partner Violence via Self-Interviewing in Rural Liberia and Malawi," NBER Working Papers 29584, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Ham, Andrés & Guarín, Ángela & Ruiz, Juanita, 2024. "How accurately are household surveys measuring the LGBT population in Colombia? Evidence from a list experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    11. Assefa, Thomas W. & Kadam, Aditi & Magnan, Nicholas & McCullough, Ellen & McGavock, Tamara, 2022. "Who is asking and how? The effects of enumerator gender and survey method in measuring intimate partner violence," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322543, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Marco Gregori & Martijn G. Jong & Rik Pieters, 2024. "The Crosswise Model for Surveys on Sensitive Topics: A General Framework for Item Selection and Statistical Analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 89(3), pages 1007-1033, September.
    13. Aycinena, Diego & Bogliacino, Francesco & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2024. "Measuring norms: Assessing the threat of social desirability bias to the Bicchieri and Xiao elicitation method," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 225-239.
    14. Cattaneo, Maria & Lergetporer, Philipp & Schwerdt, Guido & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger & Wolter, Stefan C., 2020. "Information provision and preferences for education spending: Evidence from representative survey experiments in three countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    15. Lasse J. Jessen & Sebastian Koehne & Patrick Nüß & Jens Ruhose, 2024. "Socioeconomic Inequality in Life Expectancy: Perception and Policy Demand," CESifo Working Paper Series 10940, CESifo.
    16. Billur Aksoy & Christopher S. Carpenter & Dario Sansone, 2025. "Understanding Labor Market Discrimination Against Transgender People: Evidence from a Double List Experiment and a Survey," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(1), pages 659-677, January.
    17. Simons, Andrew M. & Beltramo, Theresa & Blalock, Garrick & Levine, David I., 2017. "Using unobtrusive sensors to measure and minimize Hawthorne effects: Evidence from cookstoves," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 68-80.
    18. Barmettler, Franziska & Fehr, Ernst & Zehnder, Christian, 2012. "Big experimenter is watching you! Anonymity and prosocial behavior in the laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 17-34.
    19. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2022. "Do people demand fact-checked news? Evidence from U.S. Democrats," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    20. Leonardo Bursztyn & Georgy Egorov & Ingar Haaland & Aakaash Rao & Christopher Roth, 2023. "Justifying Dissent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(3), pages 1403-1451.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_11911. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.