Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
The main motivation behind indirect questioning is to increase participation, reduce nonresponse and reduce untruthful responses in surveys dealing with stigmatizing characteristics. Indirect questioning techniques are often advertised as methods protecting the privacy of the participants in surveys dealing with stigmatizing or sensitive issues. This is easy for anyone to see. However, different techniques do not necessarily offer the same level of protection. Quantitative measures of the protection of privacy and measures of jeopardy have been devised, which can be used, among other things, to compare one indirect questioning technique to another. Those measures are discussed and special emphasis is put on their limitations. In this chapter a case is made for the need to develop quantitative measures of the protection of privacy as perceived by the participants. A person is willing to participate in indirect questioning sample surveys if he/she feels that his/her privacy is protected and that the answer provided is not sufficient for someone to determine whether he/she bears the stigmatizing characteristic. Real life examples are cited which prove that the issue of privacy protection from the participant’s point of view is indeed very important.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Bockenholt, U., Barlas, S., van der Heijden, P.G.M. (2009). Do randomized response designs eliminate response biases? An empirical study of non compliance behavior. Journal of Applied Economics, 24, 377–392. CrossRef
Boeije, H., & Lensvelt-Mulders, G. (2002). Honest by chance: a qualitative interview study to clarify respondents’ (non-) compliance with computer assisted randomized response. Bulletin Methodologie Sociologique, 75, 24–39. CrossRef
Bose, M. (2013). Respondent privacy and estimation efficiency in randomized response surveys for disctrete-valued sensitive variables. arXiv:1303.5172v1.
Chaudhuri, A., & Saha, A. (2004). Utilizing covariates by logistic regression modeling in improved estimation of population proportions bearing stigmatizing features through randomized responses in complex surveys. Journal of the Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics, 58, 190–211. MathSciNet
Couper, M.P., Singer, E., Conrad, F.G., Groves, R.M. (2008). Risk of disclosure, perceptions of risk, and concerns about privacy and confidentiality as factors in survey participation. Journal of Official Statistics, 24, 255–275.
Hong, Z., Yan, Z., Wei, L. (2010). A note of proposed privacy measures in randomized response models. Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 77, 635–642. CrossRef
Hubbard, M.L., Casper, R.A., Lessler, J.T. (1989). Respondent reactions to item count lists and randomized response. In Proceedings of the Survey Research Section of the American Statistical Association, ASA, 544–548.
Krebs, C.P., Lindquist, C.H., Warner, T.D., Fisher, B.S., Martin, S.L., Childers, J.M. (2011). Comparing sexual assault prevalence estimates obtained with direct and indirect questioning techniques. Violence Against Women, 17, 219–235. CrossRef
Lensvelt-Mulders, G.J.L.M., Hox, J.J., van der Heijden, P.G.M. (2005). How to improve the efficiency of randomized response designs. Quality and Quantity, 39, 253–265. CrossRef
Ljungqvist, L. (1993). A unified approach to measures of privacy in randomized response models: a utilitarian perspective. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 97–103. MATH
Mangat, N.S. (1992). Two stage randomized response sampling procedure using unrelated question. Journal of the Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics, 44, 82–87. MathSciNet
Nathan, G., Sirken, M.G. (1988). Cognitive aspects of randomized response. In Proceedings of the Survey Research Section of the American Statistical Association (pp. 173–178). Washington DC: American Statistical Association.
Quatember, A. (2009). A standardization of randomized response strategies. Survey Methodology, 35, 143–152.
Singer, E. (2003). Exploring the meaning of consent: participation in research and beliefs about risks and benefits. Journal of Official Statistics, 19, 273–285.
Tsuchiya, T., & Hirai, Y. (2010). Elaborate item count questioning: why do people underreport in item count responses? Survey Research Methods, 4, 139–149.
van der Heijden, P.G.M., van Gils, G., Bouts, J., Hox, J. (2000). A comparison of randomized response, Computer assisted Self Interview, and Face to Face Direct Questioning; eliciting sensitive information in the context of welfare and unemployment benefit. Sociological Methods and Research, 28, 505–537. CrossRef
Warner, S.L. (1965). Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60, 63–69. CrossRef
- Protection of Privacy
Tasos C. Christofides
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Chapter 7
Neuer Inhalt/© ITandMEDIA