Randomized response estimation in multiple frame surveys

References

• A. Arcos, M. Rueda, and S. Singh, Generalized approach to randomized response for quantitative variables, Quality & Quantity 49 (2015), pp. 1239–1256. doi: 10.1007/s11135-014-0046-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Arnab, Randomized response trials: A unified approach for qualitative data, Comm. Statist. Theory Methods 25 (1996), pp. 1173–1183. doi: 10.1080/03610929608831756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Arnab, Optional randomized response techniques for complex survey designs, Biom. J. 46 (2004), pp. 114–124. doi: 10.1002/bimj.200210006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Arnab and G. Dorffer, Randomized response techniques for complex survey designs, Statist. Papers 48 (2006), pp. 131–141. doi: 10.1007/s00362-006-0319-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Arnab and S. Singh, Randomized response techniques: An application to the Botswana AIDS impact survey, J. Statist. Plann. Inference 140 (2010), pp. 941–953. doi: 10.1016/j.jspi.2009.09.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Arnab, M. Rueda, B. Cobo, and A. Arcos, Improved jackknife estimator for randomized response surveys, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational and Mathematical Methods in Science and Engineering, CMMSE2015, Rota, Spain, 2015, pp. 1143–1146.
   Google Scholar
• M.D. Bankier, Estimators based on several stratified samples with applications to multiple frame surveys, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 81 (1986), pp. 1074–1079. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1986.10478376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Barabesi, A design-based randomized response procedure for the estimation of population proportion and sensitivity level, J. Statist. Plann. Inference 138 (2008), pp. 2398–2408. doi: 10.1016/j.jspi.2007.10.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Barabesi and M. Marcheselli, A practical implementation and Bayesian estimation in Franklin's randomized response procedure, Comm. Statist. Simulation Comput. 35 (2006), pp. 563–573. doi: 10.1080/03610910600716548
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.K. Bar-Lev, E. Bobovitch, and B. Boukai, A note on randomized response models for quantitative data, Metrika 60 (2004), pp. 255–260. doi: 10.1007/s001840300308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Chaudhuri, Using randomized response from a complex survey to estimate a sensitive proportion in a dichotomous finite population, J. Statist. Plann. Inference 94 (2001), pp. 37–42. doi: 10.1016/S0378-3758(00)00210-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Chaudhuri, Christofides' randomized response technique in complex sample survey, Metrika 60 (2004), pp. 223–228. doi: 10.1007/s001840300305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Chaudhuri, Randomized Response and Indirect Questioning Techniques in Surveys, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• A. Chaudhuri and T. Christofides, Indirect Questioning in Sample Surveys, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• A. Chaudhuri and R. Mukerjee, Randomized Response: Theory and Techniques, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• A. Chaudhuri, T.C. Christofides, and C.R. Rao, Data gathering, analysis and protection of privacy through randomized response techniques: Qualitative and quantitative human traits, Handbook of Statistics 34, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• A. Conteh, M.C. Gavin, and J. Solomon, Quantifying illegal hunting: A novel application of the randomised response technique, Biol. Conserv. 189 (2015), pp. 16–23. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Cross, G. Edwards-Jones, H. Omed, and A.P. Williams, Use of a randomized response technique to obtain sensitive information on animal disease prevalence, Prev. Vet. Med. 96 (2010), pp. 252–262. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2010.05.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.C. Deville and C.E. Särndal, Calibration estimators in survey sampling, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 87 (1992), pp. 376–382. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1992.10475217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Diana and P.F. Perri, New scrambled response model for estimating the mean of a sensitive quantitative character, J. Appl. Stat. 37 (2010), pp. 1875–1890. doi: 10.1080/02664760903186031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Diana and P.F. Perri, A class of estimators for quantitative sensitive data, Statist. Papers 52 (2011), pp. 633–650. doi: 10.1007/s00362-009-0273-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Diana and P.F. Perri, A calibration-based approach to sensitive data: A simulation study, J. Appl. Stat. 39 (2012), pp. 53–65. doi: 10.1080/02664763.2011.578615
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B. Eichhorn and L.S. Hayre, Scrambled randomized response method for obtaining sensitive quantitative data, J. Statist. Plann. Inference 7 (1983), pp. 307–316. doi: 10.1016/0378-3758(83)90002-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.A. Eriksson, A new model for randomized response, Int. Stat. Rev. 41 (1973), pp. 101–113. doi: 10.2307/1402791
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.P. Fox and R.R. Meijer, Using item response theory to obtain individual information from randomized response data: An application using cheating data, Appl. Psychol. Meas. 32 (2008), pp. 595–610. doi: 10.1177/0146621607312277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.A. Fox and P.E. Tracy, Randomized Response. A Method for Sensitive Survey, Sage Publication, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• J.A. Fox, Randomized Response and Related Methods. Surveying Sensitive Data, Sage Publication, Inc., Thousand Oacks, CA, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• W.A. Fuller and L.F. Burmeister, Estimators for samples selected from two overlapping frames, Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Social Statistics Section, Fort Collins, CO, 1972, pp. 245–249.
   Google Scholar
• G.Z. Geng, G. Gao, Y.H. Ruan, M.R. Yu, and Y.H. Zhou, Behavioral risk profile of men who have sex with men in Beijing, China: Results from a cross-sectional survey with randomized response techniques, Chin. Med. J. 129 (2016), pp. 523–529. doi: 10.4103/0366-6999.177003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Gjestvang and S. Singh, A new randomized response model, J. R. Stat. Ser. B 68 (2006), pp. 523–530. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2006.00554.x
   Google Scholar
• B.G. Greenberg, R.R. Kuebler, J.R. Abernathy, and D.G. Horvitz, Application of the randomized response technique in obtaining quantitative data, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 66 (1971), pp. 243–250. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1971.10482248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Gunarathne, S. Kubota, P. Kumarawadu, K. Karunagoda, and H. Kon, Is hiding foot and mouth disease sensitive behavior for farmers? A survey study in Sri Lanka, Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 29 (2016), pp. 280–287. doi: 10.5713/ajas.15.0241
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Gupta, J. Shabbir, and S. Sehra, Mean and sensitivity estimation in optional randomized response models, J. Statist. Plann. Inference 140 (2010), pp. 2870–2874. doi: 10.1016/j.jspi.2010.03.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Gupta, J. Shabbir, R. Sousa, and P. Corte-Real, Regression estimation of the mean of a sensitive variable in the presence of auxiliary information, Comm. Statist. Theory Methods 41 (2012), pp. 2394–2404. doi: 10.1080/03610926.2011.641654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H.O. Hartley, Multiple frame surveys, Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Social Statistics Sections, Alexandria, VA, 1962, pp. 203–206.
   Google Scholar
• J. Houston and A. Tran, A survey of tax evasion using the randomized response technique, Adv. Taxation 13 (2001), pp. 69–94. doi: 10.1016/S1058-7497(01)13007-3
   Google Scholar
• R. Iachan and M.L. Dennis, A multiple frame approach to sampling the homeless and transient population, J. Off. Stat. 9 (1993), pp. 747–764.
   Google Scholar
• B. Jann, J. Jerke, and I. Krumpal, Asking sensitive questions using the crosswise model: An experimental survey measuring plagiarism, Public. Opin. Q. 76 (2012), pp. 32–49. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfr036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Kalton and D.W. Anderson, Sampling rare populations, J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A 149 (1986), pp. 65–82. doi: 10.2307/2981886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Kerkvliet, Estimating a logit model with randomized data: The case of cocaine use, Australian J. Stat. 36 (1994), pp. 9–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.1994.tb00634.x
   Google Scholar
• J.M. Kim and M.E. Elam, A stratified unrelated randomized response model, Statist. Papers 48 (2007), pp. 215–233. doi: 10.1007/s00362-006-0327-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Korndörfer, I. Krumpal, and S.C. Schmukle, Measuring and explain tax evasion: Improving self-reports using the crosswise model, J. Econ. Psychol. 45 (2014), pp. 18–32. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2014.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. Koyuncu, S. Gupta, and R. Sousa, Exponential-type estimators of the mean of a sensitive variable in the presence of nonsensitive auxiliary information, Comm. Statist. Simulation Comput. 43 (2014), pp. 1583–1594. doi: 10.1080/03610918.2012.737492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.P. Krebs, C.H. Lindquist, T.D. Warner, B.S. Fisher, S.L. Martin, and J.M. Childers, Comparing sexual assault prevalence estimates obtained with direct and indirect questioning techniques, Violence Against Women 17 (2011), pp. 219–235. doi: 10.1177/1077801210397743
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• I. Krumpal, Estimating the prevalence of xenophobia and anti-semitism in Germany: A comparison of the randomized response technique and direct questioning, Soc. Sci. Res. 41 (2012), pp. 1387–1403. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.05.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Lara, S.G. García, C. Ellertson, C. Camlin, and J. Suaréz, The measure of induced abortion in Mexico using random response technique, Sociol. Methods Res. 35 (2006), pp. 279–301. doi: 10.1177/0049124106290442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Lara, J. Strickler, C.D. Olavarrieta, S.G. García, and C. Ellertson, Measuring induced abortion in Mexico: A comparison of four methodologies, Sociol. Methods Res., 32 (2004), pp. 529–558. doi: 10.1177/0049124103262685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.S. Lee, S.A. Sedory, and S. Singh, Estimating at least seven measures of qualitative variables from a single sample using randomized response technique, Statist. Probab. Lett. 83 (2013), pp. 399–409. doi: 10.1016/j.spl.2012.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G.J.L.M. Lensvelt-Mulders, J.J. Hox, P.G.M. van der Heijden, and C.J.M. Mass, Meta-analysis of randomized response research: Thirty-five years of validation, Sociol. Methods Res. 33 (2005), pp. 319–348. doi: 10.1177/0049124104268664
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Y. Liu and G.L. Tian, Multi-category parallel models in the design of surveys with sensitive questions, Stat. Interface 6 (2013), pp. 137–142. doi: 10.4310/SII.2013.v6.n1.a13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Lohr, Multiple Frame Surveys, In: Handbook of Statistics 29A, Sample Surveys: Design, Methods and Applications, C.R. Rao, and D. Pfeffermann, eds., North Holland, Amsterdam, 2009, pp. 71-88.
   Google Scholar
• S. Lohr, Dual frame surveys: Recent developments and challenges, 45th Scientific Meeting of the Italian Statistical Society, 16–18. Padua, Italy, June, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• S. Lohr and J.N.K. Rao, Estimation in multiple-frame surveys, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 101 (2006), pp. 1019–1030. doi: 10.1198/016214506000000195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.E. Lund, Estimators in multiple frame surveys, Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section, American Statistical Association, Pittsburgh, PA, 1968, pp. 282–286.
   Google Scholar
• P.K. Mahajan and R. Singh, Optimum stratification for scrambled response in pps sampling, Metron LXIII (2005), pp. 103–114.
   Google Scholar
• F. Mecatti, A single frame multiplicity estimator for multiple frame surveys, Surv. Methodol. 33 (2007), pp. 151–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Molina, M. Rueda, A. Arcos, and M.G. Ranalli, Multinomial logistic estimation in dual frame surveys, SORT 39(2) (2015), pp. 309–336.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Nuno, N. Bunnefeld, L.C. Naiman, and E.J. Milner-Gulland, A novel approach to assessing the prevalence and drivers of illegal bushmeat hunting in the Serengeti, Conserv. Biol. 2 (2013), pp. 1355–1365. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12124
   Google Scholar
• O. Odumade and S. Singh, An alternative to the Bar-Lev, Bobovitch, and Boukai randomized response model, Sociol. Methods Res. 20 (2010), pp. 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• M. Ostapczuk, J. Musch, and M. Mashagen, A randomized-response investigation of the education effect in attitudes towards foreigners, Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 39 (2009), pp. 920–931. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.588
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. Özgül and H. Cingi, A new estimator based on auxiliary information through quantitative randomized response techniques, J. Mod. Appl. Stat. Methods. 16 (2017), pp. 364–387. doi: 10.22237/jmasm/1493598060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Pal, Unbiasedly estimating of total of a stigmatizing variable from a complex survey on permitting options for direct or randomized responses, Statist. Papers 49 (2008), pp. 157–164. doi: 10.1007/s00362-006-0001-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.F. Perri, Modified randomized devices for Simmons' model, Model. Assist. Stat. Appl. 3 (2008), pp. 233–239.
   Google Scholar
• P.F. Perri and G. Diana, Scrambled response models based on auxiliary variables, in Advances in Theoretical and Applied Statistics. N. Torelli, F.Pesarin, and A. Bar-Hen, eds., Spriger-Verlag, Berlin, 2013, pp. 281–291.
   Google Scholar
• P.F. Perri, E. Pelle, and M. Stranges, Estimating induced abortion and foreign irregular presence using the randomized response crossed model, Soc. Indic. Res. 129 (2016), pp. 601–618. doi: 10.1007/s11205-015-1136-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.F. Perri, B. Cobo, and M. Rueda, A mixed-mode sensitive research on cannabis use and sexual addiction: Improving self-reporting by means of indirect questioning techniques, Quality Quantity (2017), DOI:1007/s11135-017-0537-0, in press
   Google Scholar
• K.H. Pollock and Y. Bek, A comparison of three randomized response models for quantitative data, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 71 (1976), pp. 884–886. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1976.10480963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Quatember, An extension of the standardized randomized response technique to a multi-stage setup, Stat. Methods Appl. 21 (2012), pp. 475–484. doi: 10.1007/s10260-012-0209-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Quenouille, Approximation tests of correlation in time series, J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. 11 (1949), pp. 18–84.
   Google Scholar
• M.G. Ranalli, A. Arcos, M. Rueda, and A. Teodoro, Calibration estimation in dual-frame surveys, Stat. Methods Appl. 25 (2016), pp. 321–349. doi: 10.1007/s10260-015-0336-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.N.K. Rao and C. Wu, Pseudo empirical likelihood inference for multiple frame surveys, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 105 (2010), pp. 1494–1503. doi: 10.1198/jasa.2010.tm09534
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Rueda, A. Arcos, and B. Cobo, Use of randomized response techniques when data are obtained from two frames, Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 9 (2015), pp. 389–399.
   Google Scholar
• M. Rueda, B. Cobo, and A. Arcos, An improved class of estimators in RR surveys, Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 41 (2017), pp. 2307–2318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Rueda, A. Arcos, D. Molina, and M.G. Ranalli, Estimation techniques for discrete response variables in multiple frame surveys with complex sampling designs, Int. Stat. Rev. 86 (2018), pp. 51–67. doi: 10.1111/insr.12218
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Saha, A simple randomized response technique in complex surveys, Metron LXV (2007), pp. 59–66.
   Google Scholar
• A. Saha, Optional randomized response in stratified unequal probability sampling: A simulation based numerical study with Kuks method, Test 16 (2007), pp. 346–354. doi: 10.1007/s11749-006-0013-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.E. Särndal, B. Swenson, and J. Wretman, Model Assisted Survey Sampling, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1992.
   Google Scholar
• A.C. Singh and F. Mecatti, Generalized multiplicity-adjusted Horvitz–Thompson estimation as a unified approach to multiple frame surveys, J. Off. Stat. 27 (2011), pp. 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Singh and T.A. Tarray, An Improvement over Kim and Elam stratified unrelated question randomized response Mode using Neyman allocation, Sankhya B 77 (2015), pp. 91–107. doi: 10.1007/s13571-014-0088-5
   Google Scholar
• C.J. Skinner, On the efficiency of raking ration estimation for multiple frame surveys, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 86 (1991), pp. 779–784. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1991.10475109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.J. Skinner and J.N.K. Rao, Estimation in dual frame surveys with complex designs, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 91 (1996), pp. 349–356. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1996.10476695
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Striegel, R. Ulrich, and P. Simon, Randomized response estimates for doping and illicit drug use in elite athletes, Drug. Alcohol. Depend. 106 (2010), pp. 230–232. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.07.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.H. Stubbe, A.M.J Chorus, L.E Frank, O. de Hon, and P.G.M. van der Heijden, Prevalence of use of performance enhancing drugs by fitness center members, Drug. Test. Anal. 6 (2013), pp. 434–438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T.S. Tracy and S. Singh, Calibration estimators in randomized response surveys, Metron LVII (1999), pp. 47–68.
   Google Scholar
• P.G.M. van der Heijden, G. van Gils, J. Bouts, and J.J. Hox, A comparison of randomized response, computer-assisted self-interview, and face-to-face direct questioning, Sociol. Methods Res. 28 (2000), pp. 505–537. doi: 10.1177/0049124100028004005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.L. Warner, Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 60 (1965), pp. 63–69. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1965.10480775
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K.M. Wolter, Introduction to Variance Estimation, 2nd ed., Springer, New York, 2007.
   Google Scholar