Abstract
Randomized response (RR) is a well-known method for measuring sensitive behavior. Yet this method is not often applied because: (i) of its lower efficiency and the resulting need for larger sample sizes which make applications of RR costly; (ii) despite its privacy-protection mechanism the RR design may not be followed by every respondent; and (iii) the incorrect belief that RR yields estimates only of aggregate-level behavior but that these estimates cannot be linked to individual-level covariates. This paper addresses the efficiency problem by applying item randomized-response (IRR) models for the analysis of multivariate RR data. In these models, a person parameter is estimated based on multiple measures of a sensitive behavior under study which allow for more powerful analyses of individual differences than available from univariate RR data. Response behavior that does not follow the RR design is approached by introducing mixture components in the IRR models with one component consisting of respondents who answer truthfully and another component consisting of respondents who do not provide truthful responses. An analysis of data from two large-scale Dutch surveys conducted among recipients of invalidity insurance benefits shows that the willingness of a respondent to answer truthfully is related to the educational level of the respondents and the perceived clarity of the instructions. A person is more willing to comply when the expected benefits of noncompliance are minor and social control is strong.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Becker, G.S. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76, 169–217.
Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their uses in inferring an examinee’s ability. In F.M. Lord, & M.R. Novick, Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 395–379). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bock, R.D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: An application of the EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46, 443–459.
Böckenholt, U., & van der Heijden, P.G.M. (2004). Measuring noncompliance in insurance benefit regulations with randomized response methods for multiple items. In A. Biggeri, E. Dreassi, C. Lagazio, & M. Marchi (Eds.), 19th international workshop on statistical modelling (pp. 106–110). Florence: Italy.
Chaudhuri, A., & Mukerjee, R. (1988). Randomized response: Theory and techniques. New York: Marcel Dekker.
Dayton, C.M. (2003). Applications and computational strategies for the two-point mixture index of fit. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 56, 1–13.
Dayton, C.M., & Scheers, N.J. (1997). Latent class analysis of survey data dealing with academic dishonesty. In J. Rost, & R. Langeheine (Eds.), Applications of latent trait and latent class models in the social sciences (pp. 172–180). New York: Waxmann Muenster.
De Boeck, P., & Wilson, M. (2004). Explanatory item response models. New York: Springer.
Eagley, A.H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
Edgell, S.E., Himmelfarb, S., & Duncan, K.L. (1982). Validity of forced response in a randomized response model. Sociologial Methods and Research, 11, 89–110.
Elffers, H., van der Heijden, P.G.M., & Hezemans, M. (2003). Explaining regulatory non-compliance: A survey study of rule transgression for two Dutch instrumental laws, applying the randomized response method. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 409–439.
Emons, W.H.M., Sijtsma, K., & Meijer, R.R. (2005). Global, local, and graphical person-fit analysis using person-response functions. Psychological Methods, 10, 101–119.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Fox, J.A., & Tracy, P.E. (1986). Randomized response: A method for sensitive surveys. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Fox, J.-P. (2005). Randomized item response theory models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30, 1–24.
Gill, P.E., Murray, W., & Wright, M.H. (1981). Practical optimization. New York: Academic Press.
Kuk, A.Y.C. (1990). Asking sensitive questions indirectly. Biometrika., 77, 436–438.
Landsheer, J.A., van der Heijden, P.G.M., & Van Gils, G. (1999). Trust and understanding, two psychological aspects of randomized response. A study of a method for improving the estimate of social security fraud. Quality and Quantity, 33, 1–12.
Lee, R.M. (1993). Doing research on sensitive topics. London: Sage.
Lensvelt-Mulders, G.J.L.M., Hox, J.J., van der Heijden, P.G.M., & Maas, C. (2005). Meta-analysis of randomized response research: 35 years of validation. Sociological Methods and Research, 33, 319–348.
Lensvelt-Mulders, G.J.L.M., van der Heijden, P.G.M., Laudy, O., & Van Gils, G. (2006). A validation of a computer-assisted randomized response survey to estimate the prevalence of fraud in social security. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 169, 305–318.
Lindsay, B., Clogg, C.C., & Grego, J. (1991). Semiparametric estimation in the Rasch model and related exponential response models, including a simple latent class model for item analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 86, 96–107.
Maddala, G.S. (1983). Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rudas, T., Clogg, C.C., & Lindsay, B.G. (1994). A new index of fit based on mixture methods for the analysis of contingency tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 56, 623–639.
Scheers, N.J., & Dayton, C.M. (1988). Covariate randomized response models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 969–974.
van den Hout, A., & van der Heijden, P.G.M. (2002). Randomized response, statistical disclosure control and misclassification: A review. International Statistical Review, 70, 269–288.
van den Hout, A., & van der Heijden, P.G.M. (2004). The analysis of multivariate misclassified data with special attention to randomized response data. Sociological Methods and Research, 32, 310–336.
van der Heijden, P.G.M., Van Gils, G., Bouts, J., & Hox, J.J. (2000). A comparison of randomized response, computer-assisted self-interview, and face-to-face direct questioning. Sociological Methods and Research, 28, 505–537.
van der Linden, W.J., & Hambleton, R.K. (Eds.) (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (Original published 1960, Copenhagen: The Danish Institute of Educational Research.)
Warner, S.L. (1965). Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating answer bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60, 63–69.
Weber, E.U. (1997). The utility of measuring and modeling perceived risk. In A.A.J. Marley (Ed.), Choice, decision, and measurement: Essays in honor of R. Duncan Luce (pp. 45–47). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors are grateful to the reviewers whose suggestions helped to improve the clarity of the paper substantially. The authors also wish to thank the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment for making the reported data available. This research was supported in parts by grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Canadian Foundation of Innovation.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Böckenholt, U., van der Heijden, P.G.M. Item Randomized-Response Models for Measuring Noncompliance: Risk-Return Perceptions, Social Influences, and Self-Protective Responses. Psychometrika 72, 245–262 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-005-1495-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-005-1495-y