The DOI matches its Crossref record; 0 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized Response: A Survey Technique for Eliminating Evasive Answer Bias
Abstract
For various reasons individuals in a sample survey may prefer not to confide to the interviewer the correct answers to certain questions. 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. In this paper it is argued that such bias is potentially removable through allowing the interviewee to maintain privacy through the device of randomizing his response. A randomized response method for estimating a population proportion is presented as an example. Unbiased maximum likelihood estimates are obtained and their mean square errors are compared with the mean square errors of conventional estimates under various assumptions about the underlying population.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Existing defenses against the targeted backdoor attacks can be categorized into two types: detection methods and erasing methods [150].”
From Privacy and Robustness in Federated Learning: Attacks and Defenses (2024) · cites this paper as [150]
Citations
Cites
Sampling Techniques, Second Edition
G., C. W. (1963)
UnresolvedSome Theory of Sampling
E., D. W. (1950)
UnresolvedSample Survey Methods and Theory, Volume I
H., H. M. (1953)
UnresolvedSample Survey Methods and Theory, Volume II
H., H. M. (1953)
UnresolvedSampling Opinions
F., S. F. (1963)
Unresolved
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Liu, K., Kargupta, H., & Ryan, J. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2006.14 · Cited by 558
Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports: Tests using the item count technique
Holbrook, A. L., & Krosnick, J. A. (2010) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfp065 · Cited by 545
Privacy and Robustness in Federated Learning: Attacks and Defenses
Lyu, L., Yu, H., Ma, X., Chen, C., Sun, L., Zhao, J., Yang, Q., & Yu, P. S. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2022.3216981 · Cited by 548
Differential Privacy for Deep and Federated Learning: A Survey
Ouadrhiri, A. E., & Abdelhadi, A. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3151670 · Cited by 445
A Statistical Framework for Differential Privacy
Wasserman, L., & Zhou, S. (2010) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/jasa.2009.tm08651 · Cited by 438
Multivariate Regression Analysis for the Item Count Technique
Imai, K. (2011) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/jasa.2011.ap10415 · Cited by 326
Scrambled randomized response methods for obtaining sensitive quantitative data
Eichhorn, B. H., & Hayre, L. S. (1983) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/0378-3758(83)90002-2 · Cited by 284
Fanti, G. C., Pihur, V., & Erlingsson, Ú. (2016) · Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies · doi:10.1515/popets-2016-0015 · Cited by 21
Differential Privacy for Statistics: What we Know and What we Want to Learn
Dwork, C., & Smith, A. (2010) · Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality · doi:10.29012/jpc.v1i2.570 · Cited by 267
The Effect of the Question on Survey Responses: A Review
Kalton, G., & Schuman, H. (1982) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2981421 · Cited by 259
Estimation of sensitivity level of personal interview survey questions
Gupta, S., Gupta, B. C., & Singh, S. (2002) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/s0378-3758(01)00137-9 · Cited by 202
Randomization Analysis of Experimental Data: The Fisher Randomization Test
Basu*, D. (2010) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-5825-9_28 · Cited by 197
How to DP-fy ML: A Practical Guide to Machine Learning with Differential Privacy
Ponomareva, N., Hazimeh, H., Kurakin, A., Xu, Z., Denison, C., McMahan, H. B., Vassilvitskii, S., Chien, S., & Thakurta, A. G. (2023) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.14649 · Cited by 166
Privacy preserving mining of association rules
Evfimievski, A., Srikant, R., Agrawal, R., & Gehrke, J. E. (2003) · Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.is.2003.09.001 · Cited by 158
Data Swapping: Variations on a Theme by Dalenius and Reiss
Fienberg, S. E., & McIntyre, J. (2004) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-25955-8_2 · Cited by 158
Counting hard-to-count populations: the network scale-up method for public health
Bernard, H. R., Hallett, T. B., Iovita, A., et al. (2010) · Sexually Transmitted Infections · doi:10.1136/sti.2010.044446 · Cited by 152
Distributed Private Data Analysis: Simultaneously Solving How and What
Beimel, A., Kobbi Nissim, B., & Omri, E. (2008) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85174-5_25 · Cited by 164
A stratified Warner's randomized response model
Kim, J., & Warde, W. D. (2002) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/s0378-3758(02)00500-1 · Cited by 150
Identifying indicators of illegal behaviour: carnivore killing in human-managed landscapes
John, F. A. V. S., Keane, A. M., Edwards‐Jones, G., et al. (2011) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.1228 · Cited by 143
Do print and Web surveys provide the same results?
Huang, H. (2004) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.09.012 · Cited by 152
Estimating Illegal Resource Use at a Ugandan Park with the Randomized Response Technique
Solomon, J. N., Jacobson, S. K., Wald, K. D., et al. (2007) · Human Dimensions of Wildlife · doi:10.1080/10871200701195365 · Cited by 138
Randomized response estimates for doping and illicit drug use in elite athletes
Striegel, H., Ulrich, R., & Simon, P. D. (2009) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.07.026 · Cited by 137
A class of estimators for quantitative sensitive data
Diana, G., & Perri, P. F. (2009) · Statistical Papers · doi:10.1007/s00362-009-0273-1 · Cited by 136
Asking Sensitive Questions Using the Crosswise Model: An Experimental Survey Measuring Plagiarism
Jann, B., Jerke, J., & Krumpal, I. (2011) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfr036 · Cited by 128
Mean and sensitivity estimation in optional randomized response models
Gupta, S., Shabbir, J., & Sehra, S. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2010.03.010 · Cited by 122
Federated Latent Dirichlet Allocation: A Local Differential Privacy Based Framework
Wang, Y., Tong, Y., & Shi, D. (2020) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i04.6096 · Cited by 122
Randomization Analysis of Experimental Data: The Fisher Randomization Test
Basu, D. (1980) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1980.10477512 · Cited by 115
Anonymity in the dictator game revisited
Franzén, A., & Pointner, S. (2011) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2011.09.005 · Cited by 114
Holbrook, A. L., & Krosnick, J. A. (2010) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfq012 · Cited by 109
Privacy via the Johnson-Lindenstrauss Transform
Kenthapadi, K., Korolova, A., Mironov, I., & Mishra, N. (2013) · Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality · doi:10.29012/jpc.v5i1.625 · Cited by 131
Combining List Experiment and Direct Question Estimates of Sensitive Behavior Prevalence
Aronow, P. M., Coppock, A., Crawford, F. W., & GREEN, D. P. (2015) · Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology · doi:10.1093/jssam/smu023 · Cited by 110
Manipulation Attacks in Local Differential Privacy
Cheu, A., Smith, A., & Ullman, J. (2021) · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P) · doi:10.1109/sp40001.2021.00001 · Cited by 132
A Comprehensive Survey on Local Differential Privacy toward Data Statistics and Analysis
Wang, T., Zhang, X., Feng, J., & Yang, X. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20247030 · Cited by 116
Trusted AI in Multiagent Systems: An Overview of Privacy and Security for Distributed Learning
Ma, C., Li, J., Wei, K., Liu, B., Ding, M., Yuan, L., Han, Z., & Vincent Poor, H. (2023) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2023.3306773 · Cited by 96
From Extreme to Mainstream: How Social Norms Unravel
Bursztyn, L., Egorov, G., & Fiorin, S. (2017) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w23415 · Cited by 90
PPeFL: Privacy-Preserving Edge Federated Learning With Local Differential Privacy
Wang, B., Chen, Y., Jiang, H., & Zhao, Z. (2023) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2023.3264259 · Cited by 92
Metamorphic Testing and Certified Mitigation of Fairness Violations in NLP Models
Ma, P., Wang, S., & Liu, J. (2020) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2020/64 · Cited by 80
Academic economists behaving badly? A survey on three areas of unethical behavior
List, J. F., Bailey, C., Euzent, P. J., & Martin, T. (2001) · Economic Inquiry · doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.2001.tb00058.x · Cited by 129
A mixed randomized response model
Kim, J., & Warde, W. D. (2004) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2004.03.011 · Cited by 75
Chaudhuri, A. (2001) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/s0378-3758(00)00210-x · Cited by 74
Locally Differentially Private Frequency Estimation with Consistency
Wang, T., Lopuhaä-Zwakenberg, M., Li, Z., Škorić, B., & Li, N. (2020) · Network and Distributed System Security Symposium · doi:10.14722/ndss.2020.24157 · Cited by 93
Private decayed predicate sums on streams
Bolot, J. C., Fawaz, N., Muthukrishnan, S., Nikolov, A., & Taft, N. (2013) · International Conference on Database Theory · doi:10.1145/2448496.2448530 · Cited by 72
Sample Surveys With Sensitive Questions: A Nonrandomized Response Approach
Tan, M. T., Tian, G., & Tang, M. (2009) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1198/tast.2009.0002 · Cited by 66
Aguinis, H., Pierce, C. A., & Quigley, B. M. (1993) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01092.x · Cited by 65
vqSGD: Vector Quantized Stochastic Gradient Descent
Gandikota, V., Kane, D. M., Maity, R. K., & Mazumdar, A. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Information Theory · doi:10.1109/tit.2022.3161620 · Cited by 89
The turnover intentions of information systems auditors
Muliawan, A. D., Green, P. F., & Robb, D. A. (2009) · International Journal of Accounting Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.accinf.2009.03.001 · Cited by 64
Privacy Preservation in Database Applications: A Survey
Zhou, S., Li, F., Tao, Y., & Xiao, X. (2009) · Chinese Journal of Computers · doi:10.3724/sp.j.1016.2009.00847 · Cited by 62
Pan-private algorithms via statistics on sketches
Mir, D., Muthukrishnan, S., Nikolov, A., & Wright, R. N. (2011) · ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS) · doi:10.1145/1989284.1989290 · Cited by 72
An Axiomatic View of Statistical Privacy and Utility
Kifer, D., & Lin, B.-R. (2012) · Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality · doi:10.29012/jpc.v4i1.610 · Cited by 59
Binarizing Split Learning for Data Privacy Enhancement and Computation Reduction
Pham, N. D., Abuadbba, A., Gao, Y., Phan, K. T., & Chilamkurti, N. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · doi:10.1109/tifs.2023.3274391 · Cited by 61
Franklin, L. A. (1989) · Communication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · doi:10.1080/03610928908829913 · Cited by 60
Evaluation of cigarette smoking among adolescents: The Muscatine study
Lauer, R. M., Akers, R. L., Massey, J., et al. (1982) · Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/0091-7435(82)90045-7 · Cited by 60
The logistic regression model with response variables subject to randomized response
van den Hout, A., van der Heijden, P. G. M., & Gilchrist, R. S. (2007) · Computational Statistics & Data Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.csda.2006.12.002 · Cited by 58
Surveys with negative questions for sensitive items
Esponda, F., & Guerrero, V. M. (2009) · Statistics & Probability Letters · doi:10.1016/j.spl.2009.08.019 · Cited by 57
Item Count Technique in estimating the proportion of people with a sensitive feature
Chaudhuri, A., & Christofides, T. C. (2006) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2006.01.004 · Cited by 55
Reasons of Tax Avoidance and Tax Evasion: Reflections from Pakistan
Mughal, M. M. (2012) · Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies · doi:10.22610/jebs.v4i4.320 · Cited by 54
Item Sum: A New Technique for Asking Quantitative Sensitive Questions
Trappmann, M., Krumpal, I., Kirchner, A., & Jann, B. (2013) · Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology · doi:10.1093/jssam/smt019 · Cited by 53
Some alternative strategies to Moors’ model in randomized response sampling
Singh, S., Singh, R., & Mangat, N. S. (2000) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/s0378-3758(99)00092-0 · Cited by 52
An Epidemiologic Approach to the Study of Child Molestation
David Finkelhor, B., & LEWIS, I. A. (1988) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1988.tb50852.x · Cited by 62
Lyu, L., He, X., & Li, Y. (2020) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020 · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.findings-emnlp.213 · Cited by 51
Cicarelli, J. (1984) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/0040-1625(84)90088-x · Cited by 49
Efficient Use of Two Decks of Cards in Randomized Response Sampling
Odumade, O., & Singh, S. (2009) · Communication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · doi:10.1080/03610920802225065 · Cited by 47
Lensvelt‐Mulders, G., & Boeije, H. (2005) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.001 · Cited by 47
A note on the comparison of some randomized response procedures
Guerriero, M., & Sandri, M. F. (2006) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2006.07.004 · Cited by 47
Robust privacy-utility tradeoffs under differential privacy and Hamming distortion
Sankar, L., Kalantari, K., & Sarwate, A. D. (2018) · Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) · doi:10.7282/t3-kcnb-jb12 · Cited by 47
Effect of Tax Avoidance and Tax Evasion on Personal Income Tax Administration in Nigeria
Adebisi, J. F., & Gbegi, D. O. (2013) · American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences · doi:10.11634/232907811301328 · Cited by 47
Measuring Social Desirability Effects on Self-Reported Turnout Using the Item Count Technique
Comșa, M., & Postelnicu, C. (2012) · International Journal of Public Opinion Research · doi:10.1093/ijpor/eds019 · Cited by 46
Cryptographic Randomized Response Techniques
Ambainis, A., Jakobsson, M., & Lipmaa, H. (2004) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-24632-9_31 · Cited by 46
RRreg: An R Package for Correlation and Regression Analyses of Randomized Response Data
Heck, D. W., & Moshagen, M. (2018) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v085.i02 · Cited by 44
Why reports of outcome evaluations are often biased or uninterpretable
Moskowitz, J. M. (1993) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/0149-7189(93)90032-4 · Cited by 43
Hewett, P., Erulkar, A. S., & Mensch, B. (2003) · doi:10.31899/pgy6.1071 · Cited by 44
Reips, U. (2006) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/11383-006 · Cited by 53
Bilateral Privacy-Preserving Worker Selection in Spatial Crowdsourcing
Wang, H., Yang, Y., Wang, E., Liu, X., Wei, J., & Wu, J. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2022.3186023 · Cited by 40
On randomized response surveys for estimating a proportion
Nayak, T. K. (1994) · Communication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · doi:10.1080/03610929408831448 · Cited by 40
Javaid, S. U., Joseph, G., Chellaraj, G., Andrés, L., Rajan, S. I., & Solotaroff, J. L. (2017) · World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks · doi:10.1596/1813-9450-8044 · Cited by 37
Breaking the Communication-Privacy-Accuracy Trilemma
Chen, W., Kairouz, P., & Özgür, A. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Information Theory · doi:10.1109/tit.2022.3218772 · Cited by 87
Modeling survey response bias – with an analysis of the demand for an advanced electronic device
Hsiao, C. H., & Sun, B. (1998) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/s0304-4076(98)00053-0 · Cited by 38
Extensions of Mangat's randomized-response model
Kim, J., Tebbs, J. M., & An, S.-W. (2004) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2004.10.005 · Cited by 38
Plagiarism in Student Papers: Prevalence Estimates Using Special Techniques for Sensitive Questions
Coutts, E., Jann, B., Krumpal, I., & Näher, A. (2011) · Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik · doi:10.1515/jbnst-2011-5-612 · Cited by 39
Estimating illicit drug use through telephone interviews and the randomized response technique
Weissman, A., Steer, R. A., & Lipton, D. S. (1986) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/0376-8716(86)90054-2 · Cited by 38
Measurement Error, Unit Nonresponse, and Self-Reports of Abortion Experiences
Peytchev, A., Peytcheva, E., & Groves, R. M. (2010) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfq002 · Cited by 37
Zimmerman, R. S., & Langer, L. M. (1995) · The Journal of Sex Research · doi:10.1080/00224499509551781 · Cited by 36
Singh, H. P., & Mathur, N. (2004) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2004.01.002 · Cited by 35
Estimation in Truncated Parameter Spaces.
Casella, G., & Moors, J. J. A. (1986) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2289026 · Cited by 35
An Adversarial Approach to Protocol Analysis and Selection in Local Differential Privacy
Gürsoy, M. E., Liu, L., Chow, K.-H., Truex, S., & Wei, W. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · doi:10.1109/tifs.2022.3170242 · Cited by 34
Procuring honest responses indirectly
Chua, T. C., & Tsui, A. K. C. (2000) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/s0378-3758(00)00109-9 · Cited by 34
Li, C., He, A., Wen, Y., Liu, G., & Chronopoulos, A. T. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Services Computing · doi:10.1109/tsc.2023.3242338 · Cited by 35
Randomized response in stratified sampling
Christofides, T. C. (2003) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2003.11.001 · Cited by 32
On the Privacy-Utility Trade-Off With and Without Direct Access to the Private Data
Zamani, A., Oechtering, T. J., & Skoglund, M. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Information Theory · doi:10.1109/tit.2023.3326070 · Cited by 31
Student (Mis)Use of Generative AI Tools for University-Related Tasks
Reiter, L., Jörling, M., Fuchs, C., Working group ‘Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education’, & Böhm, R. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2462083 · Cited by 53
Local Differential Privacy: Tools, Challenges, and Opportunities
Ye, Q., & Hu, H. (2020) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-981-15-3281-8_2 · Cited by 32
Randomized response trials: a unified approach for qualitative data
Arnab, R. (1996) · Communication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · doi:10.1080/03610929608831756 · Cited by 31
Respondent hazards in the unrelated question randomized response model
Greenberg, B., Kuebler, R. R., Abernathy, J. R., et al. (1977) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/0378-3758(77)90005-2 · Cited by 31
LDPGuard: Defenses Against Data Poisoning Attacks to Local Differential Privacy Protocols
Huang, K., Ouyang, G., Ye, Q., Hu, H., Zheng, B., Zhao, X., Zhang, R., & Zhou, X. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2024.3358909 · Cited by 33
Logistic regression analysis of randomized response data with missing covariates
Hsieh, S., Lee, S. M., & Shen, P. (2009) · Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference · doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2009.09.020 · Cited by 30
A social cognition approach to health psychology: Philosophical and methodological issues
Abraham, C., & Hamfson, S. E. (1996) · Psychology and Health · doi:10.1080/08870449608400254 · Cited by 30
Saeidian, S., Cervia, G., Oechtering, T. J., & Skoglund, M. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Information Theory · doi:10.1109/tit.2023.3304378 · Cited by 29
Data Poisoning Attacks and Defenses to LDP-Based Privacy-Preserving Crowdsensing
Zheng, Z., Li, Z., Huang, C., Long, S., Li, M., & Shen, X. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2024.3363507 · Cited by 30
P2P collaborative filtering with privacy
Kaleli, C., & Polat, H. (2010) · TURKISH JOURNAL OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING & COMPUTER SCIENCES · doi:10.3906/elk-0808-21 · Cited by 29
Measuring associations with randomized response
Fox, J. A., & Tracy, P. E. (1984) · Social Science Research · doi:10.1016/0049-089x(84)90020-6 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Warner, S. L.
- Affiliations
- Claremont Graduate University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Warner, Stanley L.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Statistical Association
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1965-03
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 309
- Pages
- 63-69
- ISSN
- 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-274X
- OpenAlex
- W2013823004
- Cited by
- 3,263
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 135 · 2025: 189 · 2024: 224 · 2023: 211 · 2022: 190 · 2021: 219 · 2020: 208 · 2019: 185 · 2018: 171 · 2017: 141 · 2016: 151 · 2015: 123 · 2014: 114 · 2013: 120 · 2012: 96
- FWCI
- 2.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the American Statistical Association (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Census and Population Estimation
- Keywords
- randomized response, sensitive questions, population proportion estimation, maximum likelihood estimation, mean squared error comparison, survey nonresponse
- MeSH terms
- Data Collection, Surveys and Questionnaires, Research, Sampling Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review