IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/stintr/v18y2017i2p193-210n9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating Sensitive Population Proportion Using a Combination of Binomial and Hypergeometric Randomized Responses by Direct and Inverse Mechanism

Author

Listed:
  • Dihidar Kajal

    (Sampling and Official Statistics Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India)

  • Bhattacharya Manjima

    (Credit Swiss Company, Mumbai, Maharastra, India)

Abstract

For various reasons individuals in a sample survey may prefer not to confide to the interviewer the correct answers to certain potentially sensitive questions such as the illegal use of drugs, illegal earning, or incidence of acts of domestic violence, etc. In such cases the individuals may elect not to reply at all or to reply with incorrect answers. The resulting evasive answer bias is ordinarily difficult to assess. The use of a randomized response method for estimating the proportion of individuals possessing those sensitive attributes can potentially eliminate the bias. Following Chaudhuri and Dihidar (2014) and Dihidar (2016), here, as a possible variant, we have made an attempt to estimate the sensitive population proportion using a combination of binomial and hypergeometric randomized responses by direct and inverse mechanism. Along with the traditional simple random sampling, with and without replacement, we consider here sampling of respondents by unequal probabilities. Essential theoretical derivations for unbiased estimator, variance and variance estimators are presented for several sampling schemes. A numerical illustration is performed to make a comparative study of the relative efficiencies of the direct and inverse mechanism.

Suggested Citation

  • Dihidar Kajal & Bhattacharya Manjima, 2017. "Estimating Sensitive Population Proportion Using a Combination of Binomial and Hypergeometric Randomized Responses by Direct and Inverse Mechanism," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 18(2), pages 193-210, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:stintr:v:18:y:2017:i:2:p:193-210:n:9
    DOI: 10.21307/stattrans-2016-066
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.21307/stattrans-2016-066
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.21307/stattrans-2016-066?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. Arijit Chaudhuri & Mausumi Bose & Kajal Dihidar, 2011. "Estimating sensitive proportions by Warner’s randomized response technique using multiple randomized responses from distinct persons sampled," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 111-124, February.
    2. A. Chaudhuri & R. Mukherjee, 1987. "Randomized Response Techniques: A Review," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 41(1), pages 27-44, March.
    3. Sarjinder Singh & Stephen Sedory, 2013. "A new randomized response device for sensitive characteristics: an application of the negative hypergeometic distribution," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 71(1), pages 3-8, June.
    4. Christopher R. Gjestvang & Sarjinder Singh, 2006. "A new randomized response model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 68(3), pages 523-530, June.
    5. Arijit Chaudhuri & Mausumi Bose & Kajal Dihidar, 2011. "Estimation of a sensitive proportion by Warner’s randomized response data through inverse sampling," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 343-354, May.
    6. Shonkwiler, J.S., 2016. "Variance of the truncated negative binomial distribution," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 195(2), pages 209-210.
    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. Kajal Dihidar & Manjima Bhattacharya, 2017. "Estimating Sensitive Population Proportion Using A Combination Of Binomial And Hypergeometric Randomized Responses By Direct And Inverse Mechanism," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 18(2), pages 193-210, June.
    2. Singh Housila P. & Gorey Swarangi M., 2017. "A Generalized Randomized Response Model," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 18(4), pages 669-686, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Sarjinder Singh, 2020. "Reply to the correction by Grover and Kaur: a new randomized response model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 82(3), pages 865-868, July.
    5. Housila P. Singh & Swarangi M. Gorey, 2017. "A Generalized Randomized Response Model," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 18(4), pages 669-686, December.
    6. Giancarlo Diana & Pier Francesco Perri, 2010. "New scrambled response models for estimating the mean of a sensitive quantitative character," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(11), pages 1875-1890.
    7. Shu-Hui Hsieh & Shen-Ming Lee & Su-Hao Tu, 2018. "Randomized response techniques for a multi-level attribute using a single sensitive question," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 291-306, March.
    8. Erum Zahid & Javid Shabbir & Sat Gupta & Ronald Onyango & Sadia Saeed, 2022. "A generalized class of estimators for sensitive variable in the presence of measurement error and non-response," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Leonardo Egidi & Ioannis Ntzoufras, 2020. "A Bayesian quest for finding a unified model for predicting volleyball games," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(5), pages 1307-1336, November.
    10. Heiko Groenitz, 2015. "Using prior information in privacy-protecting survey designs for categorical sensitive variables," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 167-189, February.
    11. Truong-Nhat Le & Shen-Ming Lee & Phuoc-Loc Tran & Chin-Shang Li, 2023. "Randomized Response Techniques: A Systematic Review from the Pioneering Work of Warner (1965) to the Present," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-26, April.
    12. 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.
    13. Sabrina Giordano & Pier Perri, 2012. "Efficiency comparison of unrelated question models based on same privacy protection degree," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 987-999, November.
    14. María del Mar Rueda & Beatriz Cobo & Antonio Arcos, 2021. "Regression Models in Complex Survey Sampling for Sensitive Quantitative Variables," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-13, March.
    15. Lucio Barabesi & Sara Franceschi & Marzia Marcheselli, 2012. "A randomized response procedure for multiple-sensitive questions," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 703-718, August.
    16. Lucio Barabesi & Marzia Marcheselli, 2010. "Bayesian estimation of proportion and sensitivity level in randomized response procedures," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 75-88, July.
    17. 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.
    18. Shu-Ching Su & Stephen A. Sedory & Sarjinder Singh, 2015. "Kuk’s Model Adjusted for Protection and Efficiency," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 44(3), pages 534-551, August.
    19. Shu-Hui Hsieh & Shen-Ming Lee & Chin-Shang Li & Su-Hao Tu, 2016. "An alternative to unrelated randomized response techniques with logistic regression analysis," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 25(4), pages 601-621, November.
    20. Sarjinder Singh & Stephen A. Sedory, 2011. "Cramer-Rao Lower Bound of Variance in Randomized Response Sampling," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(3), pages 536-546, August.

    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:vrs:stintr:v:18:y:2017:i:2:p:193-210:n:9. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.