Metrika

, 67:251 | Cite as

Two new models for survey sampling with sensitive characteristic: design and analysis

Article

Abstract

Sensitive topics or highly personal questions are often being asked in medical, psychological and sociological surveys. This paper proposes two new models (namely, the triangular and crosswise models) for survey sampling with the sensitive characteristics. We derive the maximum likelihood estimates (MLEs) and large-sample confidence intervals for the proportion of persons with sensitive characteristic. The modified MLEs and their asymptotic properties are developed. Under certain optimality criteria, the designs for the cooperative parameter are provided and the sample size formulas are given. We compare the efficiency of the two models based on the variance criterion. The proposed models have four advantages: neither model requires randomizing device, the models are easy to be implemented for both interviewer and interviewee, the interviewee does not face any sensitive questions, and both models can be applied to both face-to-face personal interviews and mail questionnaires.

Keywords

Maximum likelihood estimate Randomizing device Randomized response technique Sensitive questions Warner’s model 

References

  1. Abul-Ela AA, Greenberg BG, Horvitz DG (1967) A multi-proportions randomized response model. J Am Stat Assoc 62:990–1008CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourke PD (1982) Randomized response multivariate designs for categorical data. Commun Stat A Theory Methods 11:2889–2901MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chaudhuri A, Mukerjee R (1988) Randomized response: theory and techniques. Marcel Dekker, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Chaudhuri A, Stenger H (1992) Survey sampling: theory and methods. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Cochran WG (1977) Sampling techniques, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Daniel WW (1993) Collecting sensitive data by randomized response: an annotated bibliography, 2nd edn. Research Monograph No. 107. Georgia State University Business Press, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  7. Devore JL (1977) A note on the randomized response technique. Commun Stat A Theory Methods 6:1525–1529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dowling TA, Shachtman RH (1975) On the relative efficiency of randomized response models. J Am Stat Assoc 70:84–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eriksson SA (1973) A new model for randomized response. Int Stat Rev 41:101–113Google Scholar
  10. Flingner MA, Policello GE, Singh J (1977) A comparison of two randomized response survey methods with consideration for the level of respondent protection. Commun Stat A Theory Methods 6:1511–1524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Folsom RE, Greenberg BG, Horvitz DG, Abernathy JR (1973) The two alternate questions randomized response model for human surveys. J Am Stat Assoc 68:525–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Franklin LA (1989) Randomized response sampling from dichotomous populations with continuous randomization. Surv Methodol 15:225–235Google Scholar
  13. Franklin LA (1998) Randomized response techniques. In: Armitage P, Colton T (eds) Encyclopedia of biostatistics. Wiley, New York, pp 3696–3703Google Scholar
  14. Gould AL, Shah BV, Abernathy JR (1969) Unrelated question randomized response techniques with two trials per respondent. In: 1969 Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section, American Statistical Association, pp 351–359Google Scholar
  15. Greenberg BG, Abernathy JR, Horvitz DG (1986) Randomized response. In: Kotz S, Johnson NL (eds) Encyclopedia of statistical sciences, Vol. 7. Wiley, New York, pp 540–548Google Scholar
  16. Greenberg BG, Abul-Ela AA, Simmons WR, Horvitz DG (1969) The unrelated question randomized response model: theoretical framework. J Am Stat Assoc 64:520–539CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Greenberg BG, Horvitz DG, Abernathy JR (1974) Comparison of randomized response designs. In: Prochan F, Serfling RJ (eds) Reliability and biometry, statistical analysis of life length. Philadelphia, SIAM, pp 787–815Google Scholar
  18. Hedayat AS, Sinha BK (1991) Design and inference in finite population sampling. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Horvitz DG, Shah BV, Simmons WR (1967) The unrelated question randomized response model. In: 1967 Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section, American Statistical Association, pp 65–72Google Scholar
  20. Horvitz DG, Greenberg BG, Abernathy JR (1975) Recent developments in randomized designs. In: Srivastava JN (ed) A survey of statistical design and linear models. North Holland / American Elsevier Publishing Co., New York, pp 271–285Google Scholar
  21. Horvitz DG, Greenberg BG, Abernathy JR (1976) Randomized response: a data gathering device for sensitive questions. Int Stat Rev 44:181–196MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim JM, Warde WD (2004) A stratified Warner’s randomized response model. J Stat Plann Infer 120: 155–165MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim JM, Elam ME (2005) A two-stage stratified Warner’s randomized response model using optimal allocation. Metrika 61:1–7MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. Kong SY (1997) Survey sampling for sensitive questions. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Renmin University, Beijing, P. R. ChinaGoogle Scholar
  25. Levy KJ (1976) Reducing the occurrence of omitted or untruthful responses when testing hypotheses concerning proportions. Psychol Bull 83:759–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liu PT, Chow LP (1976) The efficiency of the multiple trial randomized response technique. Biometrics 32:607–618MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu PT, Chow LP, Mosley WH (1975) Use of the randomized response technique with a new randomizing device. J Am Stat Assoc 70:329–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moors JJA (1971) Optimization of the unrelated question randomized response model. J Am Stat Assoc 66:627–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moors JJA (1981) Inadmissibility of linearly invariant estimators in truncated parameter spaces. J Am Stat Assoc 76:910–915MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. Saha A (2006) Optimal randomized response in stratified unequal probability sampling—a simulation based numerical study with Kuk’s method. Test (in press)Google Scholar
  31. Tracy DS, Mangat NS (1996) Some developments in randomized response sampling during the last decade—a follow up of review by Chaudhuri and Mukerjee. J Appl Stat Sci 4:147–159MATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Warner SL (1965) Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. J Am Stat Assoc 60:63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mathematics and Computational ScienceHunan University of Science and TechnologyXiangtanPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Division of BiostatisticsUniversity of Maryland Greenebaum Cancer CenterBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsHong Kong Baptist UniversityKowloon TongPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations