IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/mpopst/v23y2016i4p222-238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An efficient two-stage randomized response model under stratified random sampling

Author

Listed:
  • Sally Abdelfatah
  • Reda Mazloum

Abstract

A two-stage randomized response model is extended to stratified random sampling in order to find out more efficient estimators of proportions built from sensitive questions, which respondents may not answer truthfully, in a population divided into homogeneous subgroups. In each subgroup, the respondents who have not answered the sensitive question in the first stage are requested in the second stage to either answer the sensitive question (second attempt then) or to draw a card indicating “yes” or “no”. In the latter case, they are required to report the outcome. Such extension provides a more efficient estimator of the proportion of the population having a given sensitive attribute than its counterpart in simple random sampling. The extended two-stage randomized response model is more efficient than the stratified randomized response model, where respondents must answer the sensitive question either in the first or in the second stage. Moreover, it increases the respondents’ cooperation. When strata weights are unknown, they are estimated by the double sampling method.

Suggested Citation

  • Sally Abdelfatah & Reda Mazloum, 2016. "An efficient two-stage randomized response model under stratified random sampling," Mathematical Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 222-238, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:mpopst:v:23:y:2016:i:4:p:222-238
    DOI: 10.1080/08898480.2016.1222222
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/08898480.2016.1222222
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/08898480.2016.1222222?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sally Abdelfatah & Reda Mazloum, 2015. "Efficient Estimation in a Two-Stage Randomized Response Model," Mathematical Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 234-251, December.
    2. Jong-Min Kim & M. E. Elam, 2005. "A two-stage stratified Warner’s randomized response model using optimal allocation," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 1-7, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Oluseun Odumade & Sarjinder Singh, 2010. "An Alternative to the Bar-Lev, Bobovitch, and Boukai Randomized Response Model," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 39(2), pages 206-221, November.
    2. Tanveer A. Tarray & Housila P. Singh & Zaizai Yan, 2017. "A Dexterous Optional Randomized Response Model," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(3), pages 565-585, August.
    3. Jong-Min Kim & Matthew Elam, 2007. "A stratified unrelated question randomized response model," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 215-233, April.
    4. Kuo-Chung Huang, 2008. "Estimation for sensitive characteristics using optional randomized response technique," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 42(5), pages 679-686, October.
    5. Jun-Wu Yu & Guo-Liang Tian & Man-Lai Tang, 2008. "Two new models for survey sampling with sensitive characteristic: design and analysis," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 251-263, April.
    6. Housila P. Singh & Tanveer A. Tarray, 2015. "An Efficient Alternative Mixed Randomized Response Procedure," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 44(4), pages 706-722, November.

    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:taf:mpopst:v:23:y:2016:i:4:p:222-238. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GMPS20 .

    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.