How to ask sensitive questions in conservation: A review of specialized questioning techniques

Biological Conservation

Volumn 189, Issue , 2014, Pages 5-15

  Nuno, Ana ^a,b   St John, Freya A V ^c  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bias; Decision making; Illegal; Measurement error; Survey methods; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DECISION MAKING; FEASIBILITY STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY; RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; SURVEY METHOD; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 84953322190     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.09.047     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. Acquisti A., John L.K., Loewenstein G. The impact of relative standards on the propensity to disclose. J. Mark. Res. 2012, 49:160-174.
2. Adams J., Parkinson L., Sanson-Fisher R.W., Walsh R.A. Enhancing self-report of adolescent smoking: the effects of bogus pipeline and anonymity. Addict. Behav. 2008, 33:1291-1296.
3. Agrawal A., Gibson C.C. Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World Dev. 1999, 27:21.
4. Aquilino W.S., Wright D.L., Supple A.J. Response effects due to bystander presence in CASI and paper-and-pencil surveys of drug use and alcohol use. Subst. Use Misuse 2000, 35:845-867.
5. Bao Y., Luo W., Zhang X. Estimating positive surveys from negative surveys. Stat. Probab. Lett. 2013, 83:551-558.
6. Barber-Meyer S.M. Dealing with the clandestine nature of wildlife-trade market surveys. Conserv. Biol. 2010, 24:918-923.
7. Barton A.H. Asking the embarrassing question. Public Opin. Q. 1958, 22:67.
8. Blair G., Imai K. Statistical analysis of list experiments. Polit. Anal. 2012, 20:47-77.
9. Blank S.G., Gavin M.C. The randomized response technique as a tool for estimating non-compliance rates in fisheries: a case study of illegal red abalone (Haliotis rufescens) fishing in Northern California. Environ. Conserv. 2009, 36:112-119.
10. Böckenholt U., van der Heijden P.G.M. Item randomized-response models for measuring noncompliance: risk-return perceptions, social influences, and self-protective responses. Psychometrika 2007, 72:245-262.
11. Brace I. Questionnaire Design: How to Plan, Structure and Write Survey Material for Effective Market Research 2008, Kogan Page Publishers. second ed.
12. Bullock W., Imai K., Shapiro J.N. Statistical analysis of endorsement experiments: measuring support for militant groups in Pakistan. Polit. Anal. 2011, 19:363-384.
13. Bunnefeld N., Hoshino E., Milner-Gulland E.J. Management strategy evaluation: a powerful tool for conservation?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011, 26:441-447.
14. Catania J.A., Binson D., Canchola J., Pollack L.M., Hauck W., Coates T.J. Effects of interviewer gender, interviewer choice, and item wording on responses to questions concerning sexual behavior. Public Opin. Q. 1996, 60:345-375.
15. Chaudhuri A., Christofides T. Indirect Questioning in Sample Surveys 2013, Springer.
16. Corstange D. Sensitive questions, truthful answers? Modeling the list experiment with LISTIT. Polit. Anal. 2009, 17:45-63.
17. Coutts E., Jann B. Sensitive questions in online surveys: experimental results for the randomized response technique (RRT) and the unmatched count technique (UCT). Sociol. Methods Res. 2011, 40:169-193.
18. CruyffM.J.L.F., van den Hout A., van der Heijden P.G.M. The analysis of randomized response sum score variables. J.R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Statistical Methodol.) 2008, 70:21-30.
19. Droitcour J., Caspar R.A., Hubbard M.L., Parsley T.L., Visscher W., Ezzati T.M. The item count technique as a method of indirect questioning: A review of its development and a case study application. Measurement Errors in Surveys 1991, 185-210. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY. P.P. Biemer, R.M. Groves, L.E. Lyberg, N.A. Mathiowetz, S. Sudman (Eds.).
20. Droitcour J., Larson E.M. An innovative technique for asking sensitive questions: the three-card method. Bull. Méthodol. Sociol. 2002, 75:5-23.
21. Dykema J., Diloreto K., Price J., White E., Schaeffer N. ACASI gender-of-interviewer voice effects on reports to questions about sensitive behaviors among young adults. Public Opin. Q. 2012, 76:311-325.
22. Eichhorn B.H., Hayre L.S. Scrambled randomized response methods for obtaining sensitive quantitative data. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 1983, 7:307-316.
23. Esponda F., Guerrero V.M. Surveys with negative questions for sensitive items 2009, Stat. Probab, Lett.
24. Fisher R. Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning 1993, 20:303-315.
25. GAO, 1999. Survey methodology: an innovative technique for estimating sensitive survey items. Washington, DC.
26. GAO Estimating the Undocumented Population: A Grouped Answers Approach to Surveying Foreign-Born Respondents 2006, DIANE Publishing.
27. GAO Estimating Irregular Migration in a Survey: The "Two-Card Follow-Up" Method 2007, U.N. Sixth coordination meeting on international migration, New York.
28. Gavin M.C., Solomon J.N., Blank S.G. Measuring and monitoring illegal use of natural resources. Conserv. Biol. 2010, 24:89-100.
29. Glynn A.N. What can we learn with statistical truth serum?: Design and analysis of the list experiment. Public Opin. Q. 2013, 77:159-172.
30. Groenitz H. A new privacy-protecting survey design for multichotomous sensitive variables. Metrika 2014, 77:211-224.
31. Groves R.M. Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opin. Q. 2006, 70:646-675.
32. Holbrook A.L., Krosnick J.A. Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports: tests using the item count technique. Public Opin. Q. 2010, 74:37-67.
33. Horey, J., Groat, M.M., Forrest, S., Esponda, F., 2007. Anonymous data collection in sensor networks. In: 2007 Fourth Annual International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking & Services (MobiQuitous). IEEE, pp. 1-8.
34. Hox J., Lensvelt-Mulders G. Randomized response analysis in Mplus. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 2004, 11:615-620.
35. Hubbard M.L., Caspar R.A., Lessler J.T. Respondent reactions to item count lists and randomized response. Proc. Am. Stat. Assoc., Sect. Survey Res. Methods 1989, 544-548.
36. Imai K. Multivariate regression analysis for the item count technique. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 2011, 106:407-416.
37. Jackson Y., Gabrielli J., Tunno A.M., Hambrick E.P. Strategies for longitudinal research with youth in foster care: a demonstration of methods, barriers, and innovations. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2012, 34:1208-1213.
38. Jann B., Jerke J., Krumpal I. Asking sensitive questions using the crosswise model: an experimental survey measuring plagiarism. Public Opin. Q. 2012, 76:32-49.
39. Javeline D. Response effects in polite cultures - a test of acquiescente in Kazakhstan. Public Opin. Q. 1999, 63:1-28.
40. Jepson P., Jarvie J.K., MacKinnon K., Monk K.A. The end for Indonesia's lowland forests?. Science 2001, 292:859-861.
41. Jones J.P.G., Andriamarovololona M.M., Hockley N. The importance of taboos and social norms to conservation in Madagascar. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22:976-986.
42. Keane A., Jones J.P.G., Edwards-Jones G., Milner-Gulland E.J. The sleeping policeman: understanding issues of enforcement and compliance in conservation. Anim. Conserv. 2008, 11:75-82.
43. Knapp E.J., Rentsch D., Schmitt J., Lewis C., Polasky S. A tale of three villages: choosing an effective method for assessing poaching levels in western Serengeti, Tanzania. Oryx 2010, 44:178-184.
44. Lande R. Anthropogenic, ecological and genetic factors in extinction and conservation. Res. Popul. Ecol. (Kyoto) 1998, 40:259-269.
45. Landsheer J.A., Van Der P., Gils G. Van. Trust and understanding, two psychological aspects of randomized response. Qual. Quant. 1999, 33:1-12.
46. Langhaug L.F., Cheung Y.B., Pascoe S.J.S., Chirawu P., Woelk G., Hayes R.J., Cowan F.M. How you ask really matters: randomised comparison of four sexual behaviour questionnaire delivery modes in Zimbabwean youth. Sex. Transm. Infect. 2011, 87:165-173.
47. Langhaug L.F., Sherr L., Cowan F.M. How to improve the validity of sexual behaviour reporting: systematic review of questionnaire delivery modes in developing countries. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2010, 15:362-381.
48. Larson E.M., Droitcour J.A. The grouped answer method for estimating immigration status: analysis of data from the 2004 general social survey. Opportunities and Challenges for Applied Demography in the 21st Century 2012, 311-334. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht. N. Hoque, D.A. Swanson (Eds.).
49. Lau J.T.F., Yeung N.C.Y., Mui L.W.H., Tsui H.Y., Gu J. A simple new method to triangulate self-reported risk behavior data - the bean method. Sex. Transm. Dis. 2011, 38:788-792.
50. Lee Z., Sargeant A. Dealing with social desirability bias: an application to charitable giving. Eur. J. Mark. 2011, 45:703-719.
51. Lensvelt-Mulders G.J.L.M., Hox J.J., van der Heijden P.G.M. How to improve the efficiency of randomised response designs. Qual. Quant. 2005, 39:253-265.
52. Lindstrom D.P., Hattori M.K., Belachew T., Tessema F. Lifting the curtain on the conditions of sexual initiation among youth in Ethiopia. J. Adolesc. Health 2012, 50:614-620.
53. Linkie M., Smith R.J., Leader-Williams N. Mapping and predicting deforestation patterns in the lowlands of Sumatra. Biodivers. Conserv. 2004, 13:1809-1818.
54. Makkai T., Mcallister I. Measuring social indicators in opinion surveys: a method to improve accuracy on sensitive questions. Soc. Indic. Res. 1992, 27:169-186.
55. Martín-López B., Montes C., Ramírez L., Benayas J. What drives policy decision-making related to species conservation?. Biol. Conserv. 2009, 142:1370-1380.
56. Miller, J.D., 1985. The nominative technique: a new method of estimating heroin prevalence. In: Rouse, B.A., Kozel, N.J., Richards, L.G. (Eds.), Self-Report Methods of Estimating Drug Use: Meeting Current Challenges to Validity. NIDA - National Institute on Drug Abuse, pp. 104-24.
57. Milner-Gulland E.J., Bukreeva O.M., Coulson T., Lushchekina A.A., Kholodova M.V., Bekenov A.B., Grachev I.A. Reproductive collapse in saiga antelope harems. Nature 2003, 422:135.
58. Moro M., Fischer A., Czajkowski M., Brennan D., Lowassa A., Naiman L.C., Hanley N. An investigation using the choice experiment method into options for reducing illegal bushmeat hunting in western Serengeti. Conserv. Lett. 2013, 6:37-45.
59. Näher A.-F., Krumpal I. Asking sensitive questions: the impact of forgiving wording and question context on social desirability bias. Qual. Quant. 2011, 46:1601-1616.
60. Newing H. Conducting Research in Conservation: Social Science Methods and Practice 2011, Routledge.
61. Nielsen M.R., Jacobsen J.B., Thorsen B.J. Factors determining the choice of hunting and trading bushmeat in the Kilombero Valley, Tanzania. Conserv. Biol 2013.
62. Nuno, A., 2013. Managing social-ecological systems under uncertainty: implications for conservation. Imperial College London. PhD thesis.
63. Nuno A., Bunnefeld N., Milner-Gulland E.J. Matching observations and reality: using simulation models to improve monitoring under uncertainty in the Serengeti. J. Appl. Ecol. 2013, 50:488-498.
64. Nuno A., Bunnefeld N., Naiman L.C., Milner-Gulland E.J. A novel approach to assessing the prevalence and drivers of illegal bushmeat hunting in the Serengeti. Conserv. Biol. 2013, 27:1355-1365.
65. Peeters C.F.W., Lensvelt-Mulders G.J.L.M., Lasthuizen K. A note on a simple and practical randomized response framework for eliciting sensitive dichotomous and quantitative information. Sociol. Methods Res. 2010, 39:283-296.
66. Petróczi A., Nepusz T., Cross P., Taft H., Shah S., Deshmukh N., Schaffer J., Shane M., Adesanwo C., Barker J., Naughton D.P. New non-randomised model to assess the prevalence of discriminating behaviour: a pilot study on mephedrone. Subst. Abuse Treat. Prev. Policy 2011, 6:20.
67. Pollock K.H., Bek Y. A comparison of three randomized response models for quantitative data. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1976, 71:884-886.
68. Pomeroy R., Parks J., Pollnac R., Campson T., Genio E., Marlessy C., Holle E., Pido M., Nissapa A., Boromthanarat S. Fish wars: conflict and collaboration in fisheries management in Southeast Asia. Mar. Policy 2007, 31:645-656.
69. Raymond C.M., Knight A.T. Applying social research techniques to improve the effectiveness of conservation planning. Bioscience 2013, 63:320-321.
70. Razafimanahaka J.H., Jenkins R.K.B., Andriafidison D., Randrianandrianina F., Rakotomboavonjy V., Keane A., Jones J.P.G. Novel approach for quantifying illegal bushmeat consumption reveals high consumption of protected species in Madagascar. Oryx 2012, 46:584-592.
71. Roberts J.M., Brewer D.D. Estimating the prevalence of male clients of prostitute women in Vancouver with a simple capture-recapture method. J.R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A (Statistics Soc.) 2006, 169:745-756.
72. Sandbrook C., Adams W.M., Büscher B., Vira B. Social research and biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2013, 27:1487-1490.
73. Sheppard S.C., Earleywine M. Using the unmatched count technique to improve base rate estimates of risky driving behaviours among veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Inj. Prev. 2013, 19:382-386.
74. de Silva R.de S.e, Vieira E.M. Frequency and characteristics of induced abortion among married and single women in São Paulo, Brazil. Cad. Saude Publ. 2009, 25:179-187.
75. Simon P., Striegel H., Aust F., Dietz K., Ulrich R. Doping in fitness sports: estimated number of unreported cases and individual probability of doping. Addiction 2006, 101:1640-1644.
76. Sirén A.H., Cardenas J.C., Machoa J.D. The relation between income and hunting in tropical forests: an economic experiment in the field. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11:44.
77. Sirken M.G. Stratified sample surveys with Multiplicity. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1972, 67:224-227.
78. Solomon J.N., Jacobson S., Wald K.D., Gavin M.C. Estimating illegal resource use at a Ugandan park with the randomized response technique. Hum. Dimens. Wildl. 2007, 12:75-88.
79. St. John F.A.V., Edwards-Jones G., Gibbons J.M., Jones J.P.G. Testing novel methods for assessing rule breaking in conservation. Biol. Conserv. 2010, 143:1025-1030.
80. St. John F.A.V., Keane A., Edwards-Jones G., Jones L., Yarnell R.W., Jones J.P.G. Identifying indicators of illegal behaviour: carnivore killing in human-managed landscapes. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2012, 279:804-812.
81. St. John F.A.V., Keane A., Milner-Gulland E.J. Effective conservation depends upon understanding human behaviour. Key Topics in Conservation Biology 2 2013, 344-361. John Wiley & Sons, Oxford, U.K. D.W. Macdonald, K.J. Willis (Eds.).
82. Sudman S., Sirken M.G., Cowan C.D. Sampling rare and elusive populations. Science 1988, 240:991-996.
83. Thomas C.D., Cameron A., Green R.E., Bakkenes M., Beaumont L.J., Collingham Y.C., Erasmus B.F.N., De Siqueira M.F., Grainger A., Hannah L., Hughes L., Huntley B., Van Jaarsveld A.S., Midgley G.F., Miles L., Ortega-Huerta M.A., Peterson A.T., Phillips O.L., Williams S.E. Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 2004, 427:145-148.
84. Tian G.-L., Tang M.-L. Incomplete Categorical Data Design: Non-Randomized Response Techniques for Sensitive Questions in Surveys 2013, CRC Press.
85. Tian G.-L., Yu J.-W., Tang M.-L., Geng Z. A new non-randomized model for analysing sensitive questions with binary outcomes. Stat. Med. 2007, 26:4238-4252.
86. Tourangeau R., Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol. Bull. 2007, 133:859-883.
87. Trappmann M., Krumpal I., Kirchner A., Jann B. Item sum: a new techniques for asking quantitative sensitive questions. J. Surv. Stat. Methodol. 2014, 2:58-77.
88. Treves A. Hunting for large carnivore conservation. J. Appl. Ecol. 2009, 46:1350-1356.
89. Treves A., Karanth K.U. Human-carnivore conflict and perspectives on carnivore management worldwide. Conserv. Biol. 2003, 17:1491-1499.
90. Tsuchiya T., Hirai Y., Ono S. A study of the properties of the item count technique. Public Opin. Q. 2007, 71:253-272.
91. Underwood F.M., Burn R.W., Milliken T. Dissecting the illegal ivory trade: an analysis of ivory seizures data. PLoS One 2013, 8:e76539.
92. Vakilian K., Mousavi S.A., Keramat A. Estimation of sexual behavior in the 18-to-24-years-old Iranian youth based on a crosswise model study. BMC Res. Notes 2014, 7:28.
93. Van den Hout A., van der Heijden P.G.M., Gilchrist R. The logistic regression model with response variables subject to randomized response. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2007, 51:6060-6069.
94. Vitos M., Lewis J., Stevens M., Haklay M. Making local knowledge matter. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Symposium on Computing for Development - ACM DEV' 13 2013, ACM Press, New York, USA.
95. Warner S.L. Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1965, 60:63-69.
96. White P.C.L., Jennings N.V., Renwick A.R., Barker N.H.L. REVIEW: questionnaires in ecology: a review of past use and recommendations for best practice. J. Appl. Ecol. 2005, 42:421-430.
97. Xie H., Kulik L., Tanin E. Privacy-aware collection of aggregate spatial data. Data Knowl. Eng. 2011, 70:576-595.
98. Yu J.-W., Tian G.-L., Tang M.-L. Two new models for survey sampling with sensitive characteristic: design and analysis. Metrika 2008, 67:251-263.
99. Zigerell L.J. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry: list experiment misreporting. Soc. Sci. Q. 2011, 92:552-562.
100. Zink T., Levin L., Wollan P., Putnam F. Mothers' comfort with screening questions about sensitive issues, including domestic violence. J. Am. Board Fam. Med. 2006, 19:358-367.