Synthetic Data in Marketing Research: How to Evaluate and When to Trust

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.13995v1
• Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 15:13:10 GMT
• Title: Synthetic Data in Marketing Research: How to Evaluate and When to Trust
• Abstract summary: Debate over synthetic data in marketing research has polarized between claims that large language models (LLMs) make human respondents obsolete and calls to avoid them entirely.<n>We argue that both positions obscure the more useful question: not whether synthetic respondents work, but when.<n>First, we distinguish three types of synthetic data and map each to the decisions it can support.<n>Second, we develop a taxonomy of four families of accuracy measures and suggest that the wide range of reported twin accuracy, from near-perfect to near-chance, largely reflects differences in what is being measured rather than in method quality.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Debate over synthetic data in marketing research has polarized between claims that large language models (LLMs) make human respondents obsolete and calls to avoid them entirely. We argue that both positions obscure the more useful question: not whether synthetic respondents work, but when. Building on Brand, Israeli, and Ngwe (2026), we make three contributions. First, we distinguish three types of synthetic data (ungrounded LLM responses, segment-level personas, and individual-level digital twins) and map each to the decisions it can support. Second, we develop a taxonomy of four families of accuracy measures and suggest that the wide range of reported twin accuracy, from near-perfect to near-chance, largely reflects differences in what is being measured rather than in method quality. Aggregate measures often perform well even when little information is supplied to the LLM, and can mask a complete absence of respondent-level differentiation. Third, we introduce the forgotten question problem, in which a question is omitted from a fielded study, as a setting for twin-based augmentation of existing data. We propose an ex-ante answerability diagnostic that requires no ground truth: the R^2 of a random forest predicting twin outputs from the data used to construct the twins. Across 108 attitude questions from a nationally representative survey (N = 3,063), screening at R^2 above 0.7 raises the mean twin-human individual-level correlation by 15% and reduces the share of poorly answered questions from 25.9% to 4.3%. Embedding similarity and experienced-researcher judgment provide correlated but weaker screens.

Related papers

• FramingQA: Does the Question Shape the Answer? Measuring the Compositional Framing Effect [69.8983512616053]
  Large language models often change their responses to subtle rephrasings that align with an implied stance by users.<n>This can leave users with advice tainted by how they happened to phrase a question rather than by the underlying facts.<n>We introduce FramingQA, a benchmark that measures the model sensitivity to question framing across law, medicine, finance, and robotic simulations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T12:56:44Z)
• Silicon Sampling via Cross-Survey Transfer [0.0]
  Silicon sampling-using large language models (LLMs) to simulate human survey respondents has emerged as a promising approach for augmenting traditional survey research.<n>We propose a more rigorous evaluation framework in which an LLM is given a respondent's answers to one set of questions and must predict their answers to entirely different questions from the same survey.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-03T08:22:18Z)
• (Human) Attention Is (Still) All You Need: Human oversight makes AI-assisted social science reliable [15.442870614597451]
  We argue that the reliability of AI-assisted research depends not only on model capability, but also on how cognitive labour is structured between humans and machines.<n>We study this problem through Human-in-the-Loop Economic Research (HLER), a decision architecture based on pre-commitment, decision sequencing, accountability, and attention allocation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-11T03:22:24Z)
• Synthetic Personalities: How Well Can LLMs Mimic Individual Respondents Using Socio-Economic Microdata? [0.0]
  We construct detailed individual-level twins from the German Socio-Economic Panel.<n>We evaluate them across a $3 times 5 times 2 times 2$ construction-method grid.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T08:30:03Z)
• Rectification Difficulty and Optimal Sample Allocation in LLM-Augmented Surveys [0.0]
  Large Language Models can generate synthetic survey responses at low cost, but their accuracy varies unpredictably across questions.<n>We study the design problem of allocating a fixed budget of human respondents across estimation tasks when cheap LLM predictions are available for every task.<n>Our framework combines three components. First, building on Prediction-Powered Inference, we characterize a question-specific rectification difficulty that governs how quickly the estimator's variance decreases with human sample size.<n>Second, we derive a closed-form optimal allocation rule that directs more human labels to tasks where the LLM is least reliable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-19T05:45:37Z)
• Emulating Public Opinion: A Proof-of-Concept of AI-Generated Synthetic Survey Responses for the Chilean Case [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) offer promising avenues for methodological and applied innovations in survey research.<n>We evaluate the reliability of LLM-generated synthetic survey responses against ground-truth human responses from a Chilean public opinion probabilistic survey.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-11T21:43:59Z)
• Beyond Memorization: Reasoning-Driven Synthesis as a Mitigation Strategy Against Benchmark Contamination [77.69093448529455]
  We present an empirical study using an infinitely scalable framework to synthesize research-level QA directly from arXiv papers.<n>We evaluate a lack of significant performance decay near knowledge cutoff dates for models of various sizes, developers, and release dates.<n>We hypothesize that the multi-step reasoning required by our synthesis pipeline offered additional complexity that goes deeper than shallow memorization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T16:41:37Z)
• Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Conflicting Evidence [57.66282463340297]
  Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly employing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to improve the factuality of their responses.<n>In practice, these systems often need to handle ambiguous user queries and potentially conflicting information from multiple sources.<n>We propose RAMDocs (Retrieval with Ambiguity and Misinformation in Documents), a new dataset that simulates complex and realistic scenarios for conflicting evidence for a user query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T16:46:11Z)
• Uncertainty-Based Abstention in LLMs Improves Safety and Reduces Hallucinations [63.330182403615886]
  A major barrier towards the practical deployment of large language models (LLMs) is their lack of reliability. Three situations where this is particularly apparent are correctness, hallucinations when given unanswerable questions, and safety. In all three cases, models should ideally abstain from responding, much like humans, whose ability to understand uncertainty makes us refrain from answering questions we don't know.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T23:56:38Z)
• Offline Reinforcement Learning: Role of State Aggregation and Trajectory Data [64.93285984013833]
  We revisit the problem of offline reinforcement learning with value function realizability but without Bellman. Previous work by Xie and Jiang (2021) and Foster et al. (2022) left open the question whether a concentrability coefficient along with trajectory-based offline data unifies a bounded sample complexity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T18:28:45Z)
• Composed Image Retrieval with Text Feedback via Multi-grained Uncertainty Regularization [73.04187954213471]
  We introduce a unified learning approach to simultaneously modeling the coarse- and fine-grained retrieval. The proposed method has achieved +4.03%, +3.38%, and +2.40% Recall@50 accuracy over a strong baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-14T14:25:40Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.