Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Forced quantitative randomized response model: a new device

  • Published:
Metrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the present investigation, a new forced quantitative randomized response (FQRR) model has been proposed. Both situations when the values of the forced quantitative response are known and unknown are studied. The forced qualitative randomized response models due to Liu and Chow (J Am Stat Assoc 71:72–73, 1976a, Biometrics 32:607–618, 1976b) and Stem and Steinhorst (J Am Stat Assoc 79:555–564, 1984) are shown as a special case of the situation when the value of the forced quantitative randomized response is simply replaced by a forced “yes” response. The proposed FQRR model remains more efficient than the recent Bar-Lev et al. (Metrika, 60:255–260, 2004), say BBB model. The relative efficiency of the proposed FQRR model with respect to the existing competitors, like the BBB model, has been investigated under different situations. No doubt the present model will lead to several new developments in the field of randomized response sampling. The proposed FQRR model will encourage researchers/scientists to think more on these lines.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bar-Lev SK, Bobovitch E, Boukai B (2004) A note on randomized response models for quantitative data. Metrika 60:255–260

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bhargava M (1996) An investigation into the efficiencies of certain randomized response strategies. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis submitted to Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana

  • Bhargava M, Singh R (2001) Efficiency comparison of certain randomized response schemes with U-model. J Indian Soc Agric Stat 54(1):19–28

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bhargava M, Singh R (2002) On the efficiency comparison of certain randomized response strategies. Metrika 55(3):191–197

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran WG (1977) Sampling techniques, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Eichhorn BH, Hayre LS (1983) Scrambled randomized response methods for obtaining sensitive quantitative data. J Stat Plan Infer 7:307–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox JA, Tracy PE (1986) Randomized response: a method for sensitive surveys. SAGE Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gjestvang CR, Singh S (2006) A new randomized response model. J R Stat Soc B 68:523–530

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kuk AYC (1990) Asking sensitive questions indirectly. Biometrika 77:436–438

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lanke J (1975) On the choice of the unrelated question in Simons version of randomised response. J Am Stat Assoc 70:80–83

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lanke J (1976). On the degree of protection in randomized interviews. Int Stat Rev 44:197–203

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Leysieffer FW, Warner SL (1976) Respondent jeopardy and optimal designs in randomized response models. J Am Stat Assoc 71:649–656.h

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Liu PT, Chow LP (1976a). A new discrete quantitative randomized response model. J Am Stat Assoc 71:72–73

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liu PT, Chow LP (1976b) The efficiency of the multiple trial randomized response technique. Biometrics 32:607–618

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mangat NS (1994) An improved randomized response strategy. J R Stat Soc B 56:93–95

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Mangat NS, Singh R (1990) An alternative randomized response procedure. Biometrika 77(2):439–442

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Moors JJA (1997) A critical evaluation of Mangat’s two-step procedure in randomized response. Discussion paper at Center for Economic Research. Tilburg University, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Nayak TK (1994) On randomized response surveys for estimating a proportion. Commun Stat Theory Methods 23(1):3303–3321

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Singh S (2003) Advanced sampling theory with applications: how Michael “Selected” Amy. Kluwer, The Netherlands

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Stem DE, Steinhorst RK (1984) Telephone interview and mail questionnaire applications of the randomized response model. J Am Stat Assoc 79:555–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(2/3):147–158

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Warner SL (1965) Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. J Am Stat Assoc 60:63–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou G (1997) Two-stage randomized response procedures as single stage procedures. Aust J Stat 39:235–236

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics and Computer Networking, St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, MN, 56301-4498, USA

    Christopher R. Gjestvang & Sarjinder Singh

Authors
  1. Christopher R. Gjestvang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarjinder Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarjinder Singh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gjestvang, C.R., Singh, S. Forced quantitative randomized response model: a new device. Metrika 66, 243–257 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00184-006-0108-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00184-006-0108-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation