How to Ask Sensitive Questions without Getting Punched in the Nose
Publisher
Springer New York
Reference17 articles.
1. Abernathy, James R., Greenberg, Bernard G., and Horvitz, Daniel G. “Estimates of Induced Abortion in Urban North Carolina,” Demography, 7 (1970), 19–29. 2. Abernathy, James R., Greenberg, Bernard G., and Horvitz, Daniel G. “A New Survey Technique and Its Application in the Field of Public Health,” Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 48, Part 2 (October 1970), 39–55. These papers discuss the application of the random response technique in the estimation of the proportion of women which have had an abortion. 3. Abul-Ela, Abdel-Latif A., Greenberg, Bernard G., and Horvitz, Daniel G. “A Multi-Proportions Randomized Response Model,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 62 (September 1967), 990–1008. This paper extended Warner’s model to the trichotomous case designed to estimate the proportions of three related, mutually exclusive groups, one or two of which possessed a sensitive characteristic. The model is further extended to estimate any j proportions (j > 3), when all they group characteristics are mutually exclusive, with at least one and at most j − 1 of them sensitive. 4. Campbell, C., and Joiner, B. L. “How to Get the Answer without Being Sure You’ve Asked the Question,” The American Statistician, 27 (December 73), 229–231. This paper presents a detailed history of the development of the Randomized Response technique. Some useful teaching suggestions are also presented. 5. Devore, Jay L. “Estimating A Population Proportion Using Randomized Responses,” Mathematics Magazine, 52 (January 79), 38–40. This paper discusses how the Warner estimate can be modified to become a maximum likelihood estimate.
|
|