We implement a methodology that identifies respondents who are reticent in answering sensitive questions on surveys. The methodology entails asking a series of randomized response questions and identifies the reticent as those who give a set of answers that can arise only with an implausibly low probability. In a sample of Romanian company officials, we identify a specific 10% of respondents as reticent. The identifiably reticent admit to corruption interactions significantly less often than others. On values questions, they claim to be of higher moral virtue than the average respondent. We show that reticence is related to the respondent's age, the reticence of others in the region, and region itself. Our results suggest a method of improving the accuracy of survey data on corruption and values, as well as caution in interpreting the causes of cross-country differences in such data. (c) 2009 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved..
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Contact details of provider: Postal: The University of Chicago Press, Journals Division, P.O. Box 37005 Chicago, IL 60637 Fax: (773) 753-0811 Email: Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/EDCC/home.html
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)