IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v20y1991i1p104-138.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Critical Evaluation of the Randomized Response Method

Author

Listed:
  • U. N. UMESH

    (Washington State University)

  • ROBERT A. PETERSON

    (University of Texas at Austin)

Abstract

Warner (1965) introduced the Randomized Response Method (RRM) 20 years ago. This method has been advocated as a useful tool in eliciting sensitive information. Much of the early research focused on various parameter estimation methods. This article provides a comprehensive review of applications of the randomized response method with emphasis on recent publications, identifies issues now being studied, and suggests future research directions. As such, the article addresses method validation, respondent jeopardy, and new applications. In so doing, the method is considered in the broad context of obtaining responses to sensitive questions. Judging by the number of articles published, randomized response method continues to be of interest in numerous and diverse disciplines.

Suggested Citation

  • U. N. Umesh & Robert A. Peterson, 1991. "A Critical Evaluation of the Randomized Response Method," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 20(1), pages 104-138, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:20:y:1991:i:1:p:104-138
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124191020001004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124191020001004
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124191020001004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peterson, Robert A. & Kerin, Roger A., 1980. "Household income data reports in mail surveys," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 301-313, September.
    2. Buchman, Ta & Tracy, Ja, 1982. "Obtaining Responses To Sensitive Questions - Conventional Questionnaire Versus Randomized-Response Technique," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 263-271.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kundt, Thorben, 2014. "Applying “Benford’s law” to the Crosswise Model: Findings from an online survey on tax evasion," Working Paper 148/2014, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    2. Stocké, Volker & Hunkler, Christian, 2004. "Die angemessene Erfassung der Stärke und Richtung von Anreizen durch soziale Erwünschtheit," Papers 04-16, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    3. Clifford Nowell & Doug Laufer, 1997. "Undergraduate Student Cheating in the Fields of Business and Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 3-12, March.
    4. Kuo-Chung Huang, 2010. "Unbiased estimators of mean, variance and sensitivity level for quantitative characteristics in finite population sampling," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 341-352, May.
    5. John, Leslie K. & Loewenstein, George & Acquisti, Alessandro & Vosgerau, Joachim, 2018. "When and why randomized response techniques (fail to) elicit the truth," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 101-123.
    6. Stocké, Volker & Hunkler, Christian, 2004. "Die angemessene Erfassung der Stärke und Richtung von Anreizen durch soziale Erwünschtheit," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 04-16, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Coutts Elisabethen & Jann Ben & Krumpal Ivar & Näher Anatol-Fiete, 2011. "Plagiarism in Student Papers: Prevalence Estimates Using Special Techniques for Sensitive Questions," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 231(5-6), pages 749-760, October.
    2. Blume, Andreas & Lai, Ernest K. & Lim, Wooyoung, 2019. "Eliciting private information with noise: The case of randomized response," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 356-380.
    3. John, Leslie K. & Loewenstein, George & Acquisti, Alessandro & Vosgerau, Joachim, 2018. "When and why randomized response techniques (fail to) elicit the truth," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 101-123.
    4. Gerty J. L. M. Lensvelt-Mulders & Joop J. Hox & Peter G. M. van der Heijden & Cora J. M. Maas, 2005. "Meta-Analysis of Randomized Response Research," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 33(3), pages 319-348, February.
    5. Ivar Krumpal, 2013. "Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2025-2047, June.
    6. Peterson, Robert A., 2005. "Response construction in consumer behavior research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 348-353, March.
    7. Mohannad Obeid Al Shbail, 2018. "The Effect of Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict on Dysfunctional Audit Behaviour: Evidence from Jordan," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 8(3), pages 17-25, July.
    8. Lawrence A. Ponemon, 1992. "Auditor underreporting of time and moral reasoning: An experimental lab study," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 171-189, September.
    9. Hwee Ping Koh & Glennda Scully & David R. Woodliff, 2018. "Can Anticipating Time Pressure Reduce the Likelihood of Unethical Behaviour Occurring?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 197-213, November.
    10. Giuseppe Iarossi, 2006. "The Power of Survey Design : A User's Guide for Managing Surveys, Interpreting Results, and Influencing Respondents," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6975.
    11. Lawrence A. Ponemon, 1992. "La sous†évaluation du temps de travail et le raisonnement moral chez les vérificateurs: laboratoire expérimental," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 190-211, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:20:y:1991:i:1:p:104-138. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.