On the comprehensibility and perceived privacy protection of indirect questioning techniques

被引:40
作者
Hoffmann, Adrian [1 ]
de Puiseau, Berenike Waubert [1 ]
Schmidt, Alexander F. [2 ]
Musch, Jochen [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Dusseldorf, Dept Expt Psychol, Univ Str 1,Bldg 23-03, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[2] Med Sch Hamburg, Dept Psychol, Kaiserkai 1, D-20457 Hamburg, Germany
关键词
Confidentiality; Comprehension; Randomized response technique; Stochastic lie detector; Crosswise model; RANDOMIZED-RESPONSE TECHNIQUE; ASKING SENSITIVE QUESTIONS; VALIDATION; EXTENSION; INTERVIEW; MODELS; TRUST; DRUG;
D O I
10.3758/s13428-016-0804-3
中图分类号
B841 [心理学研究方法];
学科分类号
040201 ;
摘要
On surveys that assess sensitive personal attributes, indirect questioning aims at increasing respondents' willingness to answer truthfully by protecting confidentiality. However, the assumption that subjects understand questioning procedures fully and trust them to protect their privacy is rarely tested. In a scenario-based design, we compared four indirect questioning procedures in terms of their comprehensibility and perceived privacy protection. All indirect questioning techniques were found to be less comprehensible by respondents than a conventional direct question used for comparison. Less-educated respondents experienced more difficulties when confronted with any indirect questioning technique. Regardless of education, the crosswise model was found to be the most comprehensible among the four indirect methods. Indirect questioning in general was perceived to increase privacy protection in comparison to a direct question. Unexpectedly, comprehension and perceived privacy protection did not correlate. We recommend assessing these factors separately in future evaluations of indirect questioning.
引用
收藏
页码:1470 / 1483
页数:14
相关论文
共 64 条
[1]  
ABERNATHY JR, 1970, DEMOGRAPHY, V7, P19, DOI 10.2307/2060019
[2]  
ABULELA ALA, 1967, J AM STAT ASSOC, V62, P900
[3]   A new method of examining relationships between individual difference measures and sensitive behavior criteria: Evaluating the unmatched count technique [J].
Ahart, AM ;
Sackett, PR .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2004, 7 (01) :101-114
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1984, THESIS GEORGE WASHIN
[5]   mini-q: A Three-Minute Intelligence Screening [J].
Baudson, Tanja Gabriele ;
Preckel, Franzis .
DIAGNOSTICA, 2016, 62 (03) :182-197
[6]   How to show that 9 > 221: Collect judgments in a between-subjects design [J].
Birnbaum, MH .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 1999, 4 (03) :243-249
[7]   DO RANDOMIZED-RESPONSE DESIGNS ELIMINATE RESPONSE BIASES? AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF NON-COMPLIANCE BEHAVIOR [J].
Bockenholt, Ulf ;
Barlas, Sema ;
van der Heijden, Peter G. M. .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMETRICS, 2009, 24 (03) :377-392
[8]  
Boeije H., 2002, Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique, V75, P24, DOI DOI 10.1177/075910630207500104
[9]  
Chaudhuri A., 2013, INDIRECT QUESTIONING, DOI [10.1007/978-3-642-36276-7, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-36276-7]
[10]   Honest answers to embarrassing questions: Detecting cheating in the randomized response model [J].
Clark, SJ ;
Desharnais, RA .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 1998, 3 (02) :160-168