Sample survey on sensitive topics: Investigating respondents' understanding and trust in alternative versions of the randomized response technique

Journal of Research Practice

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2012, Pages

  De Schrijver, Annelies ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Misreporting; Non response; Randomized response technique; Sensitive topic

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863333024     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1712851X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Barnett, J. (1998). Sensitive questions and response effects: An evaluation. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13(1 and 2), 63-76.
2. Böckenholt, U., Barlas, S., & van der Heijden, P. G. M. (2009). Do randomized-response designs eliminate response bias? An empirical study of non-compliance behaviour. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 24(3), 377-392.
3. Boeije, H., & Lensvelt-Mulders, G. (2002). Honest by chance: A qualitative interview study to clarify respondents' (non-)compliance with computer-assisted randomized response. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 75(1), 24-39.
4. Bowling, A. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of Public Health, 27(3), 281-291.
5. Bradburn, N. M., Sudman, S., & Wansink, B. (2004). Asking questions: The definitive guide to questionnaire design for market research, political polls, and social and health questionnaires. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6. Burton, B. K., & Near, J. P. (1995). Estimating the incidence of wrongdoing and whistle-blowing: Results of a study using randomized response technique. Journal of Business Ethics, 14(1), 17-30.
7. Cannell, C. F., Miller, P. V., & Oksenberg, L. (1981). Research on interviewing techniques. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 389-437). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
8. Chaudhuri, A., & Mukerjee, R. (1988). Randomized response: Theory and techniques. New York: Marcel Dekker.
9. Coutts, E., & Jann, B. (2011). Sensitive questions in online surveys: Experimental results for the randomized response technique (RRT) and the unmatched count technique (UCT). Sociological Methods & Research, 40(1), 169-193.
10. Cruyff, M. J. L. F, Böckenholt, U., van den Hout, A., & van der Heijden, P. G. M. (2008). Accounting for self-protective responses in randomized response data from a social security survey using the zero-inflated Poisson model. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 2(1), 316-331.
11. Dalton, D. R., & Metzger, M. B. (1992). Towards candor, cooperation, & privacy in applied business ethics research: The randomized response technique (RRT). Business Ethics Quarterly, 2(2), 207-221.
12. Donovan, J. J., Dwight, S. A., & Hurtz, G. M. (2003). An assessment of the prevalence, severity, and verifiability of entry-level applicant faking using the randomized response technique. Human Performance, 16(1), 81-106.
13. Elffers, H., van der Heijden, P. G. M., & Hezemans, M. (2003). Explaining regulatory Non-compliance: A survey study of rule transgression for two Dutch instrumental laws, applying the randomized response method. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19(4), 409-439.
14. Fox, J. A., & Tracy, P. E. (1980). The randomized response approach. Applicability to criminal justice research and evaluation. Evaluation Review, 4(5), 601-622.
15. Fox, J.-P. (2005). Randomized item response theory models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral statistics, 30(2), 1-24.
16. Fuller, C. (1974). Effect of anonymity on return rate and response bias in a mail survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(3), 292-296.
17. Gibson, A. M., & Frakes, A. H. (1997). Truth or consequence: A study of critical issues and decision making in accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(2), 161-171.
18. Giles, W. F., & Feild, H. S. (1978). Effects of amount, format, and location of demographic information on questionnaire return rate and response bias of sensitive and nonsensitive items. Personnel Psychology, 31(3), 549-559.
19. Greenberg, B. G., Abul-Ela, A. A., Simmons, W. R., & Horvitz, D. G. (1969). The unrelated question randomized response model: Theoretical framework. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 64(326), 520-539.
20. Holbrook, A. L., & Krosnick, J. A. (2010). Measuring voter turnout using the randomized response technique: Evidence calling into question the method's validity. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(2), 328-343.
21. Landsheer, J. A., van der Heijden, P., & van Gils, G. (1999). Trust and understanding, two psychological aspects of randomized response: A study of a method for improving the estimate of social security fraud. Quality and Quantity, 33(1), 1-12.
22. Lara, D., Strickler, J., Diaz Olavarrieta, C., & Ellertson, C. (2004). Measuring induced abortion in Mexico: A comparison of four methodologies. Sociological Methods Research, 32(4), 529-558.
23. Larkins, E. R., Hume, E. C., & Garcha, B. S. (1997). The validity of the randomized response method in tax ethics research. Journal of Applied Business Research, 13(3), 25-32.
24. Lensvelt-Mulders, G. (2003). Randomized response technieken als instrument voor het onderzoek van sociaal gevoelige onderwerpen [Randomized response techniques as instrument for research on socially sensitive topics]. In A. E. Bronner, P. Dekker, J. C. Hoekstra, E. De Leeuw, T. Poiez, K. de Ruyter, & A. Smidst (Eds.), Ontwikkelingen in het marktonderzoek: Jaarboek 2003 [Developments in marketing research: Annual report 2003] (pp. 59-74). Haarlem, Netherlands: De Vrieseborch.
25. Lensvelt-Mulders, G., & Boeije, H. (2007). Evaluating compliance with a computer assisted randomized response technique: A qualitative study into the origins of lying and cheating. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23(1), 591-608.
26. Lensvelt-Mulders, G. J. L. M., Hox, J. J., van der Heijden, P. G. M., & Maas, C. J. M. (2005). Meta-analysis of randomized response research: Thirty-five years of validation. Sociological Methods Research, 33(3), 319-348.
27. Lensvelt-Mulders, G. J. L. M., van der Heijden, P. G. M., Laudy, O., & van Gils, G. (2006). A validation of a computer-assisted randomized response survey to estimate the prevalence of fraud in social security. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 169(2), 305-318.
28. Liu, P. T., & Chow, L. P. (1976). A new discrete quantitative randomized response model. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 71(353), 72-73.
29. Peeters, C. F. W. (2005). Measuring politically sensitive behaviour: Using probability theory in the form of randomized response to estimate prevalence and incidence of misbehaviour in the public sphere: A test on integrity violations. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
30. Rasinski, K. A., Willis, G. B., Baldwin, A. K., Yeh, W., & Lee, L. (1999). Methods of data collection, perceptions of risks and losses, and motivation to give truthful answers to sensitive survey questions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(5), 465-481.
31. Robertson, D. C., & Rymon, T. (2001). Purchasing agents' deceptive behavior: A randomized response technique study. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(3), 455-479.
32. Scheers, N. J. (1992). A review of randomized response techniques. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 25(1), 27-41.
33. Stem, D. E., & Steinhorst, R. K. (1984). Telephone interview and mail questionnaire applications of the randomized response model. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79(387), 555-564.
34. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. A. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35. Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological Bulletin, 133(5), 859-883.
36. Tracy, P. E., & Fox, J. A. (1981). The validity of randomized response for sensitive measurements. American Sociological Association, 46(2), 187-200.
37. van den Hout, A., & van der Heijden, P. G. M. (2002). Randomized response, statistical disclosure control and misclassification: A Review. International Statistical Review, 70(2), 269-288.
38. van den Hout, A., & van der Heijden, P. G. M. (2004). The analysis of multivariate misclassified data with special attention to randomized response data. Sociological Methods & Research, 32(3), 384-410.
39. van der Heijden, P. G. M., Hox, J. J., & Elffers, H. (2002). Het meten van regelnaleving: Een voorstudie in opdracht van het expertisecentrum rechtshandhaving van het ministerie van justitie [The measurement of rule compliance: A preliminarily study commissioned by the centre of expertise of law enforcement of the ministry of justice]. Leiden, Netherlands: Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving.
40. van der Heijden, P. G. M., van Gils, G., Bouts, J., & Hox, J. J. (2000). A comparison of randomized response, computer-assisted self-interview, and face-to-face direct questioning: Eliciting sensitive information in the context of welfare and unemployment benefit. Sociological Methods Research, 28(4), 505-537.
41. Warner, S. L. (1965). Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60(306), 63-69.
42. Westall, W. (2011). Comparing respondents' trust and understanding of two variants of the randomized response method. Unpublished master's dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
43. Wimbush, J. C., & Dalton, D. R. (1997). Base rate for employee theft: Convergence of multiple methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 756-763.