Block Total Response as an Alternative to the Randomized Response Method in Surveys

Raghavarao, Damaraju; Fédérer, Walter T.

doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1979.tb01055.x

Cited by 110 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…, Krumpal 2012, Rosenfeld et al 2014, Gingerich et al 2014. The design originally outlined by Warner (1965) has been extended to incorporate multiple sensitive traits (Abul-Ela et al 1967, Christofides 2005, multiple sensitive questions (Raghavarao & Federer 1979, Tamhane 1981, responses on a Likert scale (Himmelfarb 2008, De Jong et al 2010, and quantitative answers (Eichhorn & Hayre 1983, Fox & Tracy 1984.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and Analysis of the Randomized Response Technique

Blair

Imai

Zhou

2015

Journal of the American Statistical Association

141

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

About a half century ago, Warner (1965) proposed the randomized response method as a survey technique to reduce potential bias due to non-response and social desirability when asking questions about sensitive behaviors and beliefs. This method asks respondents to use a randomization device, such as a coin flip, whose outcome is unobserved by the interviewer.By introducing random noise, the method conceals individual responses and protects respondent privacy. While numerous methodological advances have been made, we find surprisingly few applications of this promising survey technique. In this paper, we address this gap by (1) reviewing standard designs available to applied researchers, (2) developing various multivariate regression techniques for substantive analyses, (3) proposing power analyses to help improve research designs, (4) presenting new robust designs that are based on less stringent assumptions than those of the standard designs, and (5) making all described methods available through open-source software. We illustrate some of these methods with an original survey about militant groups in Nigeria.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and Analysis of the Randomized Response Technique

Blair

Imai

Zhou

2015

Journal of the American Statistical Association

141

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Introduced by Raghavarao & Federer (1979), the UCT allows individuals to respond to sensitive items in an embedded questionnaire format that preserves response anonymity. The UCT (described in detail in the Methods section) presents individuals with a list of statements, one of which targets the sensitive issue.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the unmatched count technique and direct self-report for sensitive health-risk behaviors in HIV+ adults

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers often rely on self-report measures to assess sensitive health-risk behaviors in HIV+ individuals, yet the accuracy of self-report has been questioned, particularly when inquiring about behaviors that may be embarrassing, risky, and/or taboo. We compared an anonymous reporting method—the Unmatched Count Technique (UCT)—to direct self-report in order to assess reporting differences for several health-risk behaviors related to medication adherence and sexual risk. Contrary to hypotheses, the UCT only produced a significantly higher estimated base rate for one sensitive behavior: reporting medication adherence to one's physician, which may have been contextually-primed by our study design. Our results suggest that anonymous reporting methods may not increase disclosure compared to direct self-report when assessing several health-risk behaviors in HIV+ research volunteers. However, our results also suggest that contextual factors should be considered and investigated further, as they may influence perception of sensitive behavior.

show abstract

“…The unmatched count technique, first proposed by Raghavarao and Federer [9], is a survey instrument specifically designed for sensitive questions. The procedure requires that participants are randomly assigned to two groups, to which two different variants of a survey question are assigned.…”

Section: The Unmatched Count Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring snooping behavior with surveys

Marques

Guerreiro

Carriço

2014

CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In close relationships, snooping on another's mobile device is commonly regarded as an invasion of privacy. The prevalence of such behavior is, however, difficult to assess. We compared two in-person survey techniques, one in which the question about snooping behavior is posed directly, and one in which strong anonymity controls are employed. Results (n=90) reveal that, while in the first case 10% of respondents admitted to snooping, in the second the estimate was 60%. This shows that, although there is a potent social desirability bias at play, strong anonymity controls do improve estimates. Furthermore, it suggests an alarming prevalence of snooping behavior among the target population.

show abstract

Block Total Response as an Alternative to the Randomized Response Method in Surveys

Cited by 110 publications

References 5 publications

Design and Analysis of the Randomized Response Technique

Design and Analysis of the Randomized Response Technique

Comparing the unmatched count technique and direct self-report for sensitive health-risk behaviors in HIV+ adults

Measuring snooping behavior with surveys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About