On the validity of non-randomized response techniques: an experimental comparison of the crosswise model and the triangular model

被引:0
|
作者
Adrian Hoffmann
Julia Meisters
Jochen Musch
机构
[1] University of Duesseldorf,Department of Experimental Psychology
来源
Behavior Research Methods | 2020年 / 52卷
关键词
Non-randomized response technique; Crosswise model; Triangular model; Validity; Xenophobia;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Non-randomized response techniques (NRRTs) such as the crosswise model and the triangular model (CWM and TRM; Yu et al. Metrika, 67, 251–263, 2008) have been developed to control for socially desirable responding in surveys on sensitive personal attributes. We present the first study to directly compare the validity of the CWM and TRM and contrast their performance with a conventional direct questioning (DQ) approach. In a paper-pencil survey of 1382 students, we obtained prevalence estimates for two sensitive attributes (xenophobia and rejection of further refugee admissions) and one nonsensitive control attribute with a known prevalence (the first letter of respondents’ surnames). Both NRRTs yielded descriptively higher prevalence estimates for the sensitive attributes than DQ; however, only the CWM estimates were significantly higher. We attribute the higher prevalence estimates for the CWM to its response symmetry, which is lacking in the TRM. Only the CWM provides symmetric answer options, meaning that there is no “safe” alternative respondents can choose to distance themselves from being carriers of the sensitive attribute. Prevalence estimates for the nonsensitive control attribute with known prevalence confirmed that neither method suffered from method-specific bias towards over- or underestimation. Exploratory moderator analyses further suggested that the sensitive attributes were perceived as more sensitive among politically left-oriented than among politically right-oriented respondents. Based on our results, we recommend using the CWM over the TRM in future studies on sensitive personal attributes.
引用
收藏
页码:1768 / 1782
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Comparison of safety insertion techniques of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in nurses and physicians - a non-randomized interventional pilot study on a simulation model
    Engelke, Monika
    Grund, Karl-Ernst
    Schilling, Dieter
    Beilenhoff, Ulrike
    Kern-Waechter, Elisabeth
    Engelke, Olaf
    Stebner, Ferdinand
    Kugler, Christiane
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE, 2018, 56 (03): : 239 - 248
  • [12] Logistic regression analysis of non-randomized response data collected by the parallel model in sensitive surveys
    Tian, Guo-Liang
    Liu, Yin
    Tang, Man-Lai
    AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF STATISTICS, 2019, 61 (02) : 134 - 151
  • [13] COMPARISON OF RANDOMIZED AND NON-RANDOMIZED FACTORIAL-EXPERIMENTS
    EHRENFELD, S
    ZACKS, S
    ANNALS OF MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS, 1962, 33 (02): : 831 - &
  • [14] VALIDITY OF FORCED RESPONSES IN A RANDOMIZED-RESPONSE MODEL
    EDGELL, SE
    HIMMELFARB, S
    DUCHAN, KL
    SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 1982, 11 (01) : 89 - 100
  • [15] A Fair Comparison of Randomized Response Model
    Liu Zixin
    Lv Shu
    RECENT ADVANCE IN STATISTICS APPLICATION AND RELATED AREAS, PTS 1 AND 2, 2008, : 425 - +
  • [16] Video-assisted axillary surgery for cancer: Non-randomized comparison with conventional techniques
    Hussein, Osama
    El-Nahhas, Waleed
    El-Saed, Aiman
    Denewer, Adel
    BREAST, 2007, 16 (05): : 513 - 519
  • [17] A new non-randomized model for analysing sensitive questions with binary outcomes
    Tian, Guo-Liang
    Yu, Jun-Wu
    Tang, Man-Lai
    Geng, Zhi
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2007, 26 (23) : 4238 - 4252
  • [19] More than random responding: Empirical evidence for the validity of the (Extended) Crosswise Model
    Meisters, Julia
    Hoffmann, Adrian
    Musch, Jochen
    BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2023, 55 (02) : 716 - 729
  • [20] Can detailed instructions and comprehension checks increase the validity of crosswise model estimates?
    Meisters, Julia
    Hoffmann, Adrian
    Musch, Jochen
    PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (06):