IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v151y2018i1d10.1007_s10551-016-3240-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying the Randomized Response Technique in Business Ethics Research: The Misuse of Information Systems Resources in the Workplace

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda M. Y. Chu

    (Hang Seng Management College)

  • Mike K. P. So

    (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology)

  • Ray S. W. Chung

    (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology)

Abstract

Mitigating response distortion in answers to sensitive questions is an important issue for business ethics researchers. Sensitive questions may be asked in surveys related to business ethics, and respondents may intend to avoid exposing sensitive aspects of their character by answering such questions dishonestly, resulting in response distortion. Previous studies have provided evidence that a surveying procedure called the randomized response technique (RRT) is useful for mitigating such distortion. However, previous studies have mainly applied the RRT to individual dichotomous questions (e.g., yes/no questions) in face-to-face survey settings. In this study, we focus on behavioral research examining the relationships between latent variables, which are unobserved variables measured by multiple items on Likert or bipolar scales. To demonstrate how the RRT can be applied to obtain valid answers from respondents answering a self-administered online questionnaire with Likert and bipolar scales, we build a behavioral model to study the effect of punishment severity on employees’ attitudes toward misuse of information systems resources in the workplace, which in turn influence misuse behavior. The survey findings meet our expectations. The respondents are generally more willing to disclose sensitive data about their attitudes and actual behavior related to misuse when the RRT is implemented. The RRT’s implications for causal modeling and the advantages and challenges of its use in online environments are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda M. Y. Chu & Mike K. P. So & Ray S. W. Chung, 2018. "Applying the Randomized Response Technique in Business Ethics Research: The Misuse of Information Systems Resources in the Workplace," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 195-212, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:151:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-016-3240-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-016-3240-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-016-3240-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-016-3240-5?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. Samuel S. K. Kwan & Mike K. P. So & Kar Yan Tam, 2010. "Research Note ---Applying the Randomized Response Technique to Elicit Truthful Responses to Sensitive Questions in IS Research: The Case of Software Piracy Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 941-959, December.
    2. Detmar W. Straub, 1990. "Effective IS Security: An Empirical Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 255-276, September.
    3. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    4. John D’Arcy & Anat Hovav, 2009. "Does One Size Fit All? Examining the Differential Effects of IS Security Countermeasures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 59-71, May.
    5. Amanda Chu & Patrick Chau & Mike So, 2015. "Explaining the Misuse of Information Systems Resources in the Workplace: A Dual-Process Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 209-225, September.
    6. van den Hout, Ardo & Kooiman, Peter, 2006. "Estimating the linear regression model with categorical covariates subject to randomized response," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 50(11), pages 3311-3323, July.
    7. Graeme Blair & Kosuke Imai & Yang-Yang Zhou, 2015. "Design and Analysis of the Randomized Response Technique," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(511), pages 1304-1319, September.
    8. John D'Arcy & Anat Hovav & Dennis Galletta, 2009. "User Awareness of Security Countermeasures and Its Impact on Information Systems Misuse: A Deterrence Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 79-98, March.
    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. Amanda M. Y. Chu & Mike K. P. So, 2020. "Organizational Information Security Management for Sustainable Information Systems: An Unethical Employee Information Security Behavior Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-25, April.
    2. Andy C. Y. Chong & Amanda M. Y. Chu & Mike K. P. So & Ray S. W. Chung, 2019. "Asking Sensitive Questions Using the Randomized Response Approach in Public Health Research: An Empirical Study on the Factors of Illegal Waste Disposal," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Simon Trang & Benedikt Brendel, 2019. "A Meta-Analysis of Deterrence Theory in Information Security Policy Compliance Research," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1265-1284, December.
    4. Jeffrey D. Wall & Prashant Palvia & John D’Arcy, 2022. "Theorizing the Behavioral Effects of Control Complementarity in Security Control Portfolios," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 637-658, April.
    5. Xiao-Ling Jin & Zhongyun Zhou & Yiwei Tian, 2022. "A Configurational Analysis of the Causes of Consumer Indirect Misbehaviors in Access-Based Consumption," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 135-166, January.
    6. Paul Lowry & Clay Posey & Tom Roberts & Rebecca Bennett, 2014. "Is Your Banker Leaking Your Personal Information? The Roles of Ethics and Individual-Level Cultural Characteristics in Predicting Organizational Computer Abuse," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 385-401, May.
    7. Burgstaller, Lilith & Feld, Lars P. & Pfeil, Katharina, 2022. "Working in the shadow: Survey techniques for measuring and explaining undeclared work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 661-671.
    8. Rao Faizan Ali & P.D.D. Dominic & Kashif Ali, 2020. "Organizational Governance, Social Bonds and Information Security Policy Compliance: A Perspective towards Oil and Gas Employees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-27, October.
    9. V. S. Prakash Attili & Saji K. Mathew & Vijayan Sugumaran, 2022. "Information Privacy Assimilation in IT Organizations," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 1497-1513, October.
    10. A. J. Burns & Clay Posey & James F. Courtney & Tom L. Roberts & Prabhashi Nanayakkara, 2017. "Organizational information security as a complex adaptive system: insights from three agent-based models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 509-524, June.
    11. Silva, Leiser & Hsu, Carol & Backhouse, James & McDonnell, Aidan, 2016. "Resistance and power in a security certification scheme: the case of c:cure," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68348, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Sumantra Sarkar & Anthony Vance & Balasubramaniam Ramesh & Menelaos Demestihas & Daniel Thomas Wu, 2020. "The Influence of Professional Subculture on Information Security Policy Violations: A Field Study in a Healthcare Context," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1240-1259, December.
    13. Debabrata Dey & Abhijeet Ghoshal & Atanu Lahiri, 2022. "Circumventing Circumvention: An Economic Analysis of the Role of Education and Enforcement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2914-2931, April.
    14. Jack Shih-Chieh Hsu & Sheng-Pao Shih & Yu Wen Hung & Paul Benjamin Lowry, 2015. "The Role of Extra-Role Behaviors and Social Controls in Information Security Policy Effectiveness," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 282-300, June.
    15. Mengmeng Song & Joseph Ugrin & Man Li & Jinnan Wu & Shanshan Guo & Wenpei Zhang, 2021. "Do Deterrence Mechanisms Reduce Cyberloafing When It Is an Observed Workplace Norm? A Moderated Mediation Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-16, June.
    16. Chang-Gyu Yang & Hee-Jun Lee, 2016. "A study on the antecedents of healthcare information protection intention," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 253-263, April.
    17. A. J. Burns & Clay Posey & James F. Courtney & Tom L. Roberts & Prabhashi Nanayakkara, 0. "Organizational information security as a complex adaptive system: insights from three agent-based models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    18. A. J. Burns & Tom L. Roberts & Clay Posey & Paul Benjamin Lowry & Bryan Fuller, 2023. "Going Beyond Deterrence: A Middle-Range Theory of Motives and Controls for Insider Computer Abuse," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 342-362, March.
    19. Chu, Amanda M.Y. & Omori, Yasuhiro & So, Hing-yu & So, Mike K.P., 2023. "A Multivariate Randomized Response Model for Sensitive Binary Data," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 16-35.
    20. Eun Hee Park & Jongwoo Kim & Lynn Wiles, 2023. "The role of collectivism and moderating effect of IT proficiency on intention to disclose protected health information," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 177-193, June.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:151:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-016-3240-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.