Who are the people in my neighborhood?: The 'contextual fallacy' of measuring individual context with census geographies

Abstract

Scholars deploy census-based measures of neighborhood context throughout the social sciences and epidemiology. Decades of research confirm that variation in how individuals are aggregated into geographic units to create variables that control for social, economic or political contexts can dramatically alter analyses. While most researchers are aware of the problem, they have lacked the tools to determine its magnitude in the literature and in their own projects. By using confidential access to the complete 2010 U.S. Decennial Census, we are able to construct-for all persons in the US-individual-specific contexts, which we group according to the Census-assigned block, block group, and tract. We compare these individual-specific measures to the published statistics at each scale, and we then determine the magnitude of variation in context for an individual with respect to the published measures using a simple statistic, the standard deviation of individual context (SDIC). For three key measures (percent Black, percent Hispanic, and Entropy-a measure of ethno-racial diversity), we find that block-level Census statistics frequently do not capture the actual context of individuals within them. More problematic, we uncover systematic spatial patterns in the contextual variables at all three scales. Finally, we show that within-unit variation is greater in some parts of the country than in others. We publish county-level estimates of the SDIC statistics that enable scholars to assess whether mis-specification in context variables is likely to alter analytic findings when measured at any of the three common Census units.

An Overview of the National Cancer Institute's Initiatives to Accelerate Rural Cancer Control Research

“…Boundaries are also critically important and not always clearly defined. Often whether someone is considered "in or out" matters with regards to context (28). To advance the use of context in rural health research, it is important to understand how context changes with scale, and to quantify uncertainty associated with the boundaries one chooses to use.…”

Day Time, Night Time, Over Time: Geographic and Temporal Uncertainty When Linking Event and Contextual Data

“…Common neighborhood metrics in the U.S. context include census tracts, zip codes, and occasionally school districts. Research has shown that the size of the unit will condition what we observe as well as the variance among our observations (Fowler et al 2019). Signi cantly, if we use smaller units to describe our neighborhood context we will observe more extreme results and more variation between units.…”

Bridging the gap between geographic concept and the data we have: The case of labor markets in the USA

“…In parallel with this focus on neighborhoods, researchers have raised concerns—both old and new—about how neighborhoods are defined and what kinds of uncertainty might enter an analysis because of the imperfect translation of theoretical concept to data product (Galster, 2019; Kwan, 2012; Openshaw and Taylor, 1981; Zenk et al., 2011). Researchers have also provided methods for examining this uncertainty (Fowler et al., 2019; Spielman and Folch, 2015) and estimating its effects on outcomes (Fotheringham and Wong, 1991; Root et al., 2011), as well as new data products and methods that may help to alleviate some of the problems (Johnston et al., 2016; Logan et al., 2014; Östh et al., 2014; Schroeder, 2007).…”