Assessing Sensitive Attributes Using the Randomized Response Technique: Evidence for the Importance of Response Symmetry

Randomized response techniques (RRTs) aim to reduce social desirability bias in the assessment of sensitive attributes but differ regarding privacy protection. The less protection a design offers, the more likely respondents cheat by disobeying the instructions. In asymmetric RRT designs, respondents can play safe by giving a response that is never associated with the sensitive attribute. Symmetric RRT designs avoid the incentive to cheat by not allowing such responses. We tested whether a symmetric variant of a cheating detection model (CDM) increases compliance with the instructions in a survey of academic dishonesty among 2,254 Chinese students. As we observed more noncompliance in the asymmetric than symmetric variant, we recommend the use of symmetric CDMs, which can easily be tested within multinomial models.

[1]  David M. Riefer,et al.  Multinomial Modeling and the Measurement of Cognitive Processes , 2001 .

[2]  W. R. Simmons,et al.  The Unrelated Question Randomized Response Model: Theoretical Framework , 1969 .

[3]  N. Bradburn,et al.  An Investigation of Interview Method, Threat and Response Distortion , 1976 .

[4]  Jochen Musch,et al.  A randomized‐response investigation of the education effect in attitudes towards foreigners , 2009 .

[5]  Christoph Stahl,et al.  HMMTree: A computer program for latent-class hierarchical multinomial processing tree models , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[6]  David M. Riefer,et al.  Theoretical and empirical review of multinomial process tree modeling , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[7]  R Rothkegel,et al.  Appletree: A multinomial processing tree modeling program for macintosh computers , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[8]  Jan Lanke,et al.  On the Degree of Protection in Randomized Interviews , 1976 .

[9]  Robert A. Desharnais,et al.  Honest Answers to Embarrassing Questions: Detecting Cheating in the Randomized Response Model , 1998 .

[10]  M. Sandri,et al.  A note on the comparison of some randomized response procedures , 2007 .

[11]  X Hu,et al.  GPT.EXE: A powerful tool for the visualization and analysis of general processing tree models , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[12]  Estimation of proportions using symmetric randomized response designs , 1984 .

[13]  Arndt Bröder,et al.  Improving survey research on the World-Wide Web using the randomized response technique , 2001 .

[14]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Max-imum Likelihood from Incomplete Data , 1972 .

[15]  X Hu,et al.  Multinomial processing tree models: An implementation , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[16]  Peter G. M. van der Heijden,et al.  Meta-Analysis of Randomized Response Research , 2005 .

[17]  Lars Ljungqvist,et al.  A Unified Approach to Measures of Privacy in Randomized Response Models: A Utilitarian Perspective , 1993 .

[18]  Karl Christoph Klauer,et al.  Hierarchical Multinomial Processing Tree Models: A Latent-Class Approach , 2006 .

[19]  George B. Macready,et al.  Respondents' perceived protection when using randomized response. , 1982 .

[20]  A. Campbell.  Randomized response technique. , 1987, Science.

[21]  Richard F. Antonak,et al.  Randomized response technique: a review and proposed extension to disability attitude research , 1995 .

[22]  H. Hyman.  DO THEY TELL THE TRUTH , 1944 .

[23]  D. Rubin,et al.  Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM - algorithm plus discussions on the paper , 1977 .

[24]  W. Batchelder,et al.  The statistical analysis of general processing tree models with the EM algorithm , 1994 .

[25]  Gerty J. L. M. Lensvelt-Mulders,et al.  Evaluating compliance with a computer assisted randomized response technique: a qualitative study into the origins of lying and cheating , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[26]  K. C. Klauer.  Hierarchical Multinomial Processing Tree Models: A Latent-Trait Approach , 2006 .

[27]  D. Horvitz,et al.  Application of the Randomized Response Technique in Obtaining Quantitative Data , 1971 .

[28]  G. Macready,et al.  Randomized Response Parameters as Factors in Frequency Estimates , 1985 .

[29]  S L Warner,et al.  Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. , 1965, Journal of the American Statistical Association.