Consumer Expenditure Diary Survey 2002

The Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) program provides a continuous and comprehensive flow of data on the buying habits of American consumers. These data are used widely in economic research and analysis, and in support of revisions of the Consumer Price Index. To meet the needs of users, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) produces population estimates for consumer units (CUs) of average expenditures in news releases, reports, issues, and articles in the Monthly Labor Review. Tabulated CE data are also available on the Internet and by facsimile transmission (See Section XV. APPENDIX 4). The microdata are available online at http://www/bls.gov/cex/pumdhome.htm.

These microdata files present detailed expenditure and income data for the Diary component of the CE for 2002. They include weekly expenditure (EXPD) and annual income (DTBD) files. The data in EXPD and DTBD files are categorized by a Universal Classification Code (UCC). The advantage of the EXPD and DTBD files is that with the data classified in a standardized format, the user may perform comparative expenditure (income) analysis with relative ease. The FMLD and MEMD files present data on the characteristics and demographics of CUs and CU members. The summary level expenditure and income information on the FMLD files permits the data user to link consumer spending, by general expenditure category, and household characteristics and demographics on one set of files.

Estimates of average expenditures in 2002 from the Diary survey, integrated with data from the Interview survey, are published in Consumer Expenditures in 2002. A list of recent publications containing data from the CE appears at the end of this documentation.

The microdata files are in the public domain and with appropriate credit, may be reproduced without permission. A suggested citation is: "U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Survey, Diary Survey, 2002".

STATE IDENTIFIER
Since the CE is not designed to produce state-level estimates, summing the consumer unit weights by state will not yield state population totals. A CU's basic weight reflects its probability of selection among a group of primary sampling units of similar characteristics. For example, sample units in an urban nonmetropolitan area in California may represent similar areas in Wyoming and Nevada. Among other adjustments, CUs are post-stratified nationally by sex-age-race. For example, the weights of consumer units containing a black male, age 16-24 in Alabama, Colorado, or New York, are all adjusted equivalently. Therefore, weighted population state totals will not match population totals calculated from other surveys that are designed to represent state data.
To summarize, the CE sample was not designed to produce precise estimates for individual states. Although state-level estimates that are unbiased in a repeated sampling sense can be calculated for various statistical measures, such as means and aggregates, their estimates will generally be subject to large variances. Additionally, a particular state-population estimate from the CE sample may be far from the true state-population estimate.

INTERPRETING THE DATA

Several factors should be considered when interpreting the expenditure data. The average expenditure for an item may be considerably lower than the expenditure by those CUs that purchased the item. The less frequently an item is purchased, the greater the difference between the average for all consumer units and the average of those purchasing. (See Section V.B. for ESTIMATION OF TOTAL AND MEAN EXPENDITURES). Also, an individual CU may spend more or less than the average, depending on its particular characteristics. Factors such as income, age of family members, geographic location, taste and personal preference also influence expenditures. Furthermore, even within groups with similar characteristics, the distribution of expenditures varies substantially.

Expenditures reported are the direct out-of-pocket expenditures. Indirect expenditures, which may be significant, may be reflected elsewhere. For example, rental contracts often include utilities. Renters with such contracts would record no direct expense for utilities, and therefore, appear to have no utility expenses. Employers or insurance companies frequently pay other costs. CUs with members whose employers pay for all or part of their health insurance or life insurance would have lower direct expenses for these items than those who pay the entire amount themselves. These points should be considered when relating reported averages to individual circumstances.