ScholarGate
Assistente

Comparar métodos

Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.

Randomized Response Technique×Expert Survey×List Experiment×
ÁreaPolitical SciencePolitical SciencePolitical Science
FamíliaProcess / pipelineProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Ano de origem19652011
Autor originalStanley L. WarnerComparative party-positioning research (Castles & Mair; Chapel Hill team)Survey methodology; modern estimators by Kosuke Imai, Graeme Blair, Adam Glynn
TipoSensitive-question survey techniqueSurvey of subject-matter experts to measure latent positionsSensitive-question survey experiment
Fonte seminalWarner, S. L. (1965). Randomized Response: A Survey Technique for Eliminating Evasive Answer Bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60(309), 63–69. DOI ↗Bakker, R., de Vries, C., Edwards, E., Hooghe, L., Jolly, S., Marks, G., Polk, J., Rovny, J., Steenbergen, M., & Vachudova, M. A. (2015). Measuring Party Positions in Europe: The Chapel Hill Expert Survey Trend File, 1999–2010. Party Politics, 21(1), 143–152. DOI ↗Imai, K. (2011). Multivariate Regression Analysis for the Item Count Technique. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 106(494), 407–416. DOI ↗
Outros nomesRRT, Randomized response, Warner's randomized response, Forced-response techniqueExpert judgment survey, Party expert survey, Chapel Hill Expert Survey, Expert placement surveyItem count technique, Unmatched count technique, Item count method, List randomization
Relacionados343
ResumoThe randomized response technique (RRT) is a survey method for asking about sensitive or stigmatized topics while guaranteeing each respondent's privacy. Introduced by Stanley Warner in 1965, it uses a randomizing device — a coin, die, or spinner — to determine, privately and unknown to the interviewer, whether the respondent answers the sensitive question or an alternative. Because the analyst knows only the probability distribution of the device and not the outcome for any individual, no answer can be traced to a particular question, yet the population prevalence of the sensitive trait can be recovered exactly by inverting the known randomization.An expert survey measures latent political quantities — most often parties' positions on policy dimensions — by asking a panel of country and subject-matter experts to place the objects of interest on structured numerical scales. Averaging many experts' judgments yields position estimates, while the spread across experts provides a built-in measure of uncertainty and reliability. The Chapel Hill Expert Survey is the leading example, producing comparable measures of European parties' positions on ideology, European integration, and many specific issues over time.The list experiment, also called the item count technique, is a survey design that measures the prevalence of a sensitive attitude or behavior without ever requiring any respondent to directly disclose it. Respondents are randomly split into two groups: a control group sees a list of innocuous items and reports only how many apply to them, while a treatment group sees the same list plus one sensitive item. Because respondents report only a count, no individual answer reveals their stance on the sensitive item, and the difference in average counts between the groups estimates the proportion holding the sensitive trait.
ScholarGateConjunto de dados
  1. v1
  2. 3 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED

Ir para a pesquisa Baixar slides

ScholarGateComparar métodos: Randomized Response Technique · Expert Survey · List Experiment. Recuperado em 2026-06-25 de https://scholargate.app/pt/compare