Asking sensitive questions in conservation using Randomised Response Techniques

Abstract

Conservation increasingly seeks knowledge of human behaviour. However, securing reliable data can be challenging, particularly if the behaviour is illegal or otherwise sensitive. Specialised questioning methods such as Randomised Response Techniques (RRTs) are increasingly used in conservation to provide greater anonymity, increase response rates, and reduce bias. A rich RRT literature exists, but successfully navigating it can be challenging. To help conservationists access this literature, we summarise the various RRT designs available and conduct a systematic review of empirical applications of RRTs within ( n = 32), and beyond conservation ( n = 66). Our results show increased application of RRTs in conservation since 2000. We compare the performance of RRTs against known prevalence of the sensitive behaviour and relative to other questioning techniques to assess how successful RRTs are at reducing bias (indicated by securing higher estimates). Findings suggest that RRT applications in conservation were less likely than those in other disciplines to provide prevalence estimates equal to, or higher than those derived from direct questions. Across all disciplines, we found reports of non-compliance with RRT instructions were common, but rarely accounted for in study design or analysis. For the first time, we provide conservationists considering RRTs with evidence on what works, and provide guidance on how to develop robust designs suitable for conservation research contexts. We highlight when alternate methods should be used, how to increase design efficiency and improve compliance with RRT instructions. We conclude RRTs are a useful tool, but their performance depends on careful design and implementation.

Drivers of Predator Killing by Rural Residents and Recommendations for Fostering Coexistence in Agricultural Landscapes

“…In recognition of the challenges associated with investigating sensitive topics, specialized questioning techniques such as RRT are increasingly being used in conservation to provide greater anonymity to respondents, improve response rates and decrease biases. However, a recent review of RRT applications in conservation provides evidence that whilst RRTs typically outperform direct questions in other disciplines, they do not yet do so in conservation (Ibbett et al, 2021). Prior to committing to incorporating any form of specialized questioning technique into a study, we encourage researchers to consider factors such as topic sensitivity, suspected prevalence (e.g., common or rare), achievable sample size and the type of estimate required (Nuno and St. John, 2015;Hinsley et al, 2019;Ibbett et al, 2021).…”

“…However, a recent review of RRT applications in conservation provides evidence that whilst RRTs typically outperform direct questions in other disciplines, they do not yet do so in conservation (Ibbett et al, 2021). Prior to committing to incorporating any form of specialized questioning technique into a study, we encourage researchers to consider factors such as topic sensitivity, suspected prevalence (e.g., common or rare), achievable sample size and the type of estimate required (Nuno and St. John, 2015;Hinsley et al, 2019;Ibbett et al, 2021). Additionally, while our survey was conducted on behalf of the entire household, the majority of respondents were male.…”

“…The second part of the questionnaire consisted of questions regarding killing predators. Because of the sensitive nature of the questions, we employed a symmetrical forced-response RRT design (St John et al, 2010Ibbett et al, 2021), using a die as the randomization tool. Before answering each question, respondents rolled the die and were asked to provide a truthful answer if they rolled a one, two, three or four; answer "yes, " irrespective of the truth, if they rolled a five; or, answer "no, " irrespective of the truth, if they rolled a six.…”

Hidden figures: Revisiting doping prevalence estimates previously reported for two major international sport events in the context of further empirical evidence and the extant literature

“…Application of the SSC model includes assessing the prevalence of the use of neuroenhancements ( 42 ), abortion ( 43 ), drinking among first year university students ( 44 , 45 ) and illegal killing of wildlife ( 46 ). Each of these variants has advantages and disadvantages in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, as well as factors influencing compliance with the survey instructions such as understanding, cognitive demand and trust ( 6 , 47 – 52 ).…”

Spatiotemporal Patterns of Human–Carnivore Encounters in a Seasonally Changing Landscape: A Case Study of the Fishing Cat in Hakaluki Haor, Bangladesh

“…The interviews took approximately 15-30 min and were conducted in a comfortable environment. We introduced ourselves and our objectives, and then described the interview process (e.g., the types of questions, and the participants' right not to answer or stop the interview at any time), stressing that there would be no legal consequences for sharing information [33,37]. Before proceeding to the interview, the interviewees were asked to describe the physical characteristics of fishing cats (e.g., head, body, legs, tail), and the differences between fishing cats and three sympatric carnivores: the jungle cat (Felis chaus), golden jackal (Canis aureus), and small Indian civet (Viverricula indica).…”