Experimental validation of specialized questioning techniques in conservation

Abstract

Conservation increasingly relies on social science tools to understand human behavior. Specialized questioning techniques (SQTs) are a suite of methods designed to reduce bias in social surveys and are widely used to collect data on sensitive topics, including compliance with conservation rules. Most SQTs have been developed in Western, industrialized, educated, rich, and democratic countries, meaning their suitability in other contexts may be limited. Whether these techniques perform better than conventional direct questioning is important for those considering their use. We designed an experiment to validate the performance of four SQTs (unmatched count technique, randomized response technique, crosswise model, and bean method) against direct questions when asking about a commonly researched sensitive behavior in conservation, wildlife hunting. We developed fictional characters, and for each method asked respondents to report the answers that each fictional character should give when asked if they hunt wildlife. We collected data from 609 individuals living close to protected areas in two different cultural and socioeconomic contexts (Indonesia and Tanzania) to quantify the extent to which respondents understood and followed SQT instructions and to explore the sociodemographic factors that influenced a correct response. Data were modeled using binomial general linear mixed models. Participants were more likely to refuse to answer questions asked using SQTs compared with direct questions. Model results suggested that SQTs were harder for participants to understand. Demographic factors (e.g., age and education level) significantly influenced response accuracy. When sensitive responses to sensitive questions were required, all SQTs (excluding the bean method) outperformed direct questions, demonstrating that SQTs can successfully reduce sensitivity bias. However, when reviewing each method, most respondents (59–89%) reported they would feel uncomfortable using them to provide information on their own hunting behavior, highlighting the considerable challenge of encouraging truthful reporting on sensitive topics. Our results demonstrate the importance of assessing the suitability of social science methods prior to their implementation in conservation contexts.

Topic sensitivity still affects honest responding, even when specialized questioning techniques are used

“…Communities living around conservation areas often perceive researchers to represent the interests of government, and conservation NGOs, regardless of whether they actually do (Brittain et al, 2020; Kiik, 2018), which can significantly affect respondents' trust in the research process. Our findings also reinforce ethical concerns about the appropriateness of using RRT designs that force respondents to provide responses that could be construed as admissions of incriminating behavior (Ibbett et al, 2022), particularly in contexts where distrust of researchers may already be high. Alternative RRT designs, such as the Unrelated‐Question which use randomizers to determine the question answered, rather than force specific types of response, may assure respondents a greater sense of protection.…”

“…To encourage more accurate responding, we used a forced-response RRT to ask individuals whether they conducted each of five prohibited behaviors in nearby protected areas. We selected this design over other variations, as it is commonly deployed in conservation studies ( Ibbett et al, 2021 ), and piloting and previous research in the landscape ( Ibbett et al, 2022 ) suggested it would be well understood and easy to implement. The prohibited behaviors, identified as prevalent in protected areas during focus group discussions (Ibbett et al, n.d.) were; entering the nearest protected area for any reason without permission, as well as entering the nearest protected area for specific reasons including to: graze livestock; collect building materials; go fishing; and hunt wildlife.…”

“…Given the increasing application of RRTs in conservation, understanding their effectiveness is of high importance for researchers, as well as practitioners and policymakers who require reliable data to make informed decisions. Recently, a study empirically tested understanding of forced-response RRT instructions ( Ibbett et al, 2022 ). Respondents living around protected areas in Indonesia and Tanzania were asked to imagine they were a fictional character, and to provide the response characters should give when asked whether they conducted an illegal behavior, hunting wildlife.…”

A Review of Bioinformatics for Primatologists: A Note for Reducing Living Primate Model and Supporting the Conservation

“…In the era of sustainability of primate biodiversity, conservation efforts must be action [24]- [26], as well as optimization for the animal model in biomedicine [27], [28]. So, this paper aims to review the bioinformatics approach's role in studying primatology as well as the development of omics methods, which can be applied to primatology and primates as human disease models are also cited.…”

A mixed methods approach for measuring topic sensitivity in conservation

“…For example, failure to identify and acknowledge topic sensitivity may cause offence, be construed as disrespectful or alienate or endanger those involved ( Sieber & Stanley, 1988 ). Alternatively, researchers may assume some subjects to be more sensitive than they are, resulting in the use of inappropriate or unnecessarily complex methods ( Ibbett et al, 2022 ).…”