Economic statistics are commonly published without estimates of their uncertainty. We conduct two waves of a randomized controlled online experiment to assess if and how the UK public understands data uncertainty. A control group observes only the point estimate of GDP. Treatment groups are presented with alternative qualitative and quantitative communications of GDP data uncertainty. We find that most of the public understands that GDP numbers are uncertain. Quantitative communications of data uncertainty help align the public’s subjective probabilistic expectations of data uncertainty with objective estimates, but do not decrease trust in the statistical office.
Economic statistics are commonly published without any explicit indication of their uncertainty. To assess if and how the UK public interprets and understands data uncertainty, we conduct two waves of a randomized controlled online experiment. A control group is presented with the headline point estimate of GDP, as emphasized by the statistical office. Treatment groups are then presented with alternative qualitative and quantitative communications of GDP data uncertainty. We find that most of the public understands that uncertainty is inherent in official GDP numbers. But communicating uncertainty information improves understanding. It encourages the public not to take estimates at face-value, but does not decrease trust in the data. Quantitative tools to communicate data uncertainty - notably intervals, density strips, and bell curves - are especially beneficial. They reduce dispersion of the public’s subjective probabilistic expectations of data uncertainty, improving alignment with objective estimates.
