Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods

  • 제28권5호
  • /
  • Pages.493-510
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 2287-7843(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2383-4757(eISSN)
한국통계학회 (The Korean Statistical Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Partial optional randomized response technique with calibration weighting to adjust non-response in successive sampling

  • 투고 : 2021.03.19
  • 심사 : 2021.06.08
  • 발행 : 2021.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The present article endeavours to develop partial optional randomized - response technique (PORT) to deal with sensitive issues in presence of non-response in successive sampling. Calibration techniques have been embedded with PORT to estimate sensitive population mean at current move in two move successive sampling in presence of non-response. Optimum calibration weights are computed at each move with the aid of constraints based on auxiliary information. Detailed properties of the proposed estimators have been discussed. Possible cases in which non-response may creep at two moves has been explored. The proposed technique has been compared with the modified existing technique. Simulation results indicate that the proposed technique is more efficient than existing, modified one. Suitable recommendations are forwarded.

키워드

과제정보

Authors are thankful to the reviewers for their valuable suggestions, which led to improvement over the earlier version of the paper. Authors are also thankful to SERB, New Delhi, India for providing the financial assistance to carry out the present work. Authors sincerely acknowledged the free access to data by statistical abstracts of United States.

참고문헌

  1. Arnab R (2004). Optional randomized response techniques for complex survey designs, Biometrical Journal, 46, 114-124. https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200210006
  2. Arnab R (2011). Alternative estimators for randomized response techniques in multi-character surveys, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 40, 1839-1848. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610921003714188
  3. Arnab R, Singh S, and North D (2012). Use of two decks of cards in randomized response techniques for complex survey designs, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 41, 3198-3210. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610926.2012.682634
  4. Arnab R and Singh S (2013). Estimation of mean of sensitive characteristics for successive sampling, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 42, 2499-2524. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610926.2011.605233
  5. Christofides TC (2003). A generalized randomized response technique, Metrika, 57, 195-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001840200216
  6. Chaudhuri A and Dihidar K (2009). Estimating means of stigmatizing qualitative and quantitative variables from discretionary responses randomized or direct, Sankhya, 71, 123-136.
  7. Diana G and Perri PF (2010). New scrambled response models for estimating the mean of a sensitive quantitative character, Journal of Apllied Statistics, 37, 1875-1890. https://doi.org/10.1080/02664760903186031
  8. Diana G and Perri PF (2011). A class of estimators for quantitative sensitive data, Stat Papers, 52, 633-650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-009-0273-1
  9. Deville JC and Sarndal CE (1992). Calibration estimators in survey sampling, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87, 376-382. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1992.10475217
  10. Eichhorn BH and Hayre LS (1983). Scrambled randomized response method for obtaining sensitive quantitative data, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 7, 307-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-3758(83)90002-2
  11. Gupta S, Gupta B, and Singh S (2002). Estimation of sensitivity level of personal interview survey question, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 100, 239-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3758(01)00137-9
  12. Gupta S, Mehta S, Shabbir J, and Dass BK (2013). Generalized scrambling quantitative optional randomized response models, Communication in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 42, 4034-4042. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610926.2011.638427
  13. Greenberg BG, Kubler RR, and Horvitz DG (1971). Application of RR technique in obtaining quantitative data, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 66, 243-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1971.10482248
  14. Horvitz DG, Shah BV, and Simmons WR (1967). The unrelated question randomized response model, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 65-72.
  15. Himmelfarb S and Edgell SE (1980). Additive constants model: A randomized response technique for eliminating evasiveness to quantitative response questions, Psychological Bulletin, 87, 525-530. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.87.3.525
  16. Hussain Z and Al-Zahrani B (2016). Mean and sensitivity estimation of a sensitive variable through additive scrambling, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 45, 182-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610926.2013.827722
  17. Kim JM and Elam ME (2007). A stratified unrelated question randomized response model, Statistical Papers, 48, 215-233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-006-0327-6
  18. Lundstrom, S and Sarndal CE (1999). Calibration as a standard method for treatment of non-response, Journal of Official Statistics, 15, 305-327.
  19. Mangat NS and Singh S (1994). An optional randomised response sampling technique, Journal of Indian Statistical Association, 32, 71-75.
  20. Naeem N and Shabbir J (2016). Use of scrambled responses on two occasions successive sampling under non-response, Hacettepe University Bulletin of Natural Sciences and Engineering Series B: Mathematics and Statistics, 46.
  21. Pal S (2008). Unbiasedly estimating the total of a stigmatizing variable from a complex survey on permitting options for direct or randomized responses, Statistical Papers, 49, 157-164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-006-0001-z
  22. Pollock KH and Bek Y (1976). A comparison of three randomized response models for quantitative data, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 71, 884-886. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1976.10480963
  23. Perri PF and Diana G (2013). Scrambled response models Based on auxiliary variables, Advances in Theoretical and Applied Statistics(pp281-291), Springer, Berlin.
  24. Priyanka K and Trisandhya P (2019a). A Composite Class of Estimators using Scrambled Response Mechanism for Sensitive Population mean in Successive Sampling, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 48, 1009-1032. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610926.2017.1422762
  25. Priyanka K and Trisandhya P (2019b). A Item sum techniques for quantitative sensitive estimation on successive occasions, Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods, 26, 175-189. https://doi.org/10.29220/CSAM.2019.26.2.175
  26. Priyanka K, Trisandhya P, and Mittal R (2018). Dealing sensitive characters on successive occasions through a general class of estimators using scrambled response techniques, Metron, 76, 203-230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40300-017-0131-1
  27. Priyanka K, Trisandhya P, and Mittal R (2019). Scrambled response Techniques in Two Wave Rotation Sampling for Estimating Population Mean of Sensitive Characteristics with Case Study, Journal of Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics, 73, 41-52.
  28. Randles R (1982). On the asymptotic normality of statistics with estimated parameters, Annals of Statistics, 10, 462-474. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176345787
  29. Saha A (2007). A simple randomized response technique in complex surveys, Metron, LXV, 59-66.
  30. Singh GN, Suman S, Khetan M, and Paul C (2017). Some estimation procedures of sensitive character using scrambled response techniques in successive sampling, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods.
  31. Singh GN, Khetan M, and Suman S (2018). Assessment of Scrambled Response on Second Call in Two-Occasion Successive Sampling under Non-Response, Journal of Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics, 72, 147-156.
  32. Sanaullah A, Saleem I, Gupta S, and Hanif M (2020). Mean estimation with generalized scrambling using two-phase sampling, Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computations.
  33. Wu JW, Tian GL, and Tang ML (2008). Two new models for survey sampling with sensitive characteristics: Design and Analysis, Metrika, 67, 251-263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00184-007-0131-x
  34. Warner SL (1965). Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60, 63-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1965.10480775
  35. Yan Z, Wang J, and Lai J (2009). An efficiency and protection degree-based comparison among the quantitative randomized response strategies, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 38, 400-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610920802220785
  36. Yu B, Jin Z, Tian J, and Gao G (2015). Estimation of sensitive proportion by randomized response data in successive sampling, Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine, 2015, 1-6.