IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0293628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative study of randomized response techniques using separate and combined metrics of efficiency and privacy

Author

Listed:
  • Muhammad Azeem
  • Javid Shabbir
  • Najma Salahuddin
  • Sundus Hussain
  • Musarrat Ijaz

Abstract

In social surveys, the randomized response technique can be considered a popular method for collecting reliable information on sensitive variables. Over the past few decades, it has been a common practice that survey researchers develop new randomized response techniques and show their improvement over previous models. In majority of the available research studies, the authors tend to report only those findings which are favorable to their proposed models. They often tend to hide the situations where their proposed randomized response models perform worse than the already available models. This approach results in biased comparisons between models which may influence the decision of practitioners about the choice of a randomized response technique for real-life problems. We conduct a neutral comparative study of four available quantitative randomized response techniques using separate and combined metrics of respondents’ privacy level and model’s efficiency. Our findings show that, depending on the particular situation at hand, some models may be better than the other models for a particular choice of values of parameters and constants. However, they become less efficient when a different set of parameter values are considered. The mathematical conditions for efficiency of different models have also been obtained.

Suggested Citation

  • Muhammad Azeem & Javid Shabbir & Najma Salahuddin & Sundus Hussain & Musarrat Ijaz, 2023. "A comparative study of randomized response techniques using separate and combined metrics of efficiency and privacy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(10), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293628
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293628
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293628&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0293628?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giancarlo Diana & Pier Perri, 2011. "A class of estimators for quantitative sensitive data," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 633-650, August.
    2. Christopher Gjestvang & Sarjinder Singh, 2009. "An improved randomized response model: estimation of mean," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(12), pages 1361-1367.
    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. Muhammad Azeem & Sidra Ali, 2023. "A neutral comparative analysis of additive, multiplicative, and mixed quantitative randomized response models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(4), pages 1-11, April.
    2. Lucio Barabesi & Giancarlo Diana & Pier Perri, 2013. "Design-based distribution function estimation for stigmatized populations," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 76(7), pages 919-935, October.
    3. Sat Gupta & Michael Parker & Sadia Khalil, 2024. "A Ratio Estimator for the Mean Using a Mixture Optional Enhance Trust (MOET) Randomized Response Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Muhammad Azeem & Sundus Hussain & Musarrat Ijaz & Najma Salahuddin, 2024. "An improved quantitative randomized response technique for data collection in sensitive surveys," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 329-341, February.
    5. María del Mar García Rueda & Pier Francesco Perri & Beatriz Rodríguez Cobo, 2018. "Advances in estimation by the item sum technique using auxiliary information in complex surveys," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 102(3), pages 455-478, July.
    6. Cheon-Sig Lee & Shu-Ching Su & Katrina Mondragon & Veronica I. Salinas & Monique L. Zamora & Stephen Andrew Sedory & Sarjinder Singh, 2016. "Comparison of Cramer–Rao lower bounds of variances for at least equal protection of respondents," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 70(2), pages 80-99, May.
    7. Lucio Barabesi & Giancarlo Diana & Pier Perri, 2015. "Gini index estimation in randomized response surveys," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 99(1), pages 45-62, January.
    8. Andreas Quatember, 2012. "An extension of the standardized randomized response technique to a multi-stage setup," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 21(4), pages 475-484, November.
    9. Kumari Priyanka & Pidugu Trisandhya & Richa Mittal, 2018. "Dealing sensitive characters on successive occasions through a general class of estimators using scrambled response techniques," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 76(2), pages 203-230, August.
    10. Kumari Priyanka & Pidugu Trisandhya, 2019. "Modelling Sensitive Issues On Successive Waves," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 41-65, March.
    11. Priyanka Kumari & Trisandhya Pidugu, 2019. "Modelling Sensitive Issues On Successive Waves," Statistics in Transition New Series, Statistics Poland, vol. 20(1), pages 41-65, March.
    12. Mausumi Bose, 2015. "Respondent privacy and estimation efficiency in randomized response surveys for discrete-valued sensitive variables," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1055-1069, November.
    13. Tanveer AT & Housila PS, 2017. "An Improved Estimation Procedure of the Mean of a Sensitive Variable Using Auxiliary Information," Biostatistics and Biometrics Open Access Journal, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 3(2), pages 26-33, October.
    14. Javid Shabbir & Zabihullah Movaheedi, 2024. "Use of generalized randomized response model for enhancement of finite population variance: A simulation approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(12), pages 1-21, December.

    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:plo:pone00:0293628. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.