A Study of the Properties of the Item Count Technique
By T. Tsuchiya, Yoko Hirai, Shigeru Ono. 2007
140 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4aabe18a6087351d5cefc6f2ac41cf1cdd701f45
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Sociology and Political Science
- Kosuke Imai
- Graeme Blair
- A. Coppock
- Margaret Moor
- J. Krosnick
- Dean S. Karlan
- Adam Glynn
- Allyson Holbrook
In Statistics and Probability
- Kosuke Imai
- Graeme Blair
- A. Coppock
- Margaret Moor
- Adam Glynn
- Dean S. Karlan
- J. Krosnick
- Allyson Holbrook
Citations in the corpus
- Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports Tests using the item count technique (2010, result): “…that compared ICT results to direct self-report results, the statistical analyses reported did not properly model all sources of error in ICT measurements (e.g., Cobb 2001; Dalton, Daily, and Wimbush 1997; Dalton, Wimbush, and Daily 1994; Wimbush and Dalton 1997, although see Tsuchiya et al. 2007).”
- What Can We Learn with Statistical Truth Serum?Design and Analysis of the List Experiment (2013, background): “First, the list experiment tends to require a large sample size and budget in order to achieve reasonable levels of precision (Tsuchiya, 2005; Tsuchiya et al., 2007; Corstange, 2009).”
- Multivariate Regression Analysis for the Item Count Technique (2011, methodology): “For a long time, the randomized response method introduced by Warner (1965) has been a dominant technique to address this problem, and many refinements have been proposed.”
- List Randomization for Sensitive Behavior: An Application for Measuring Use of Loan Proceeds (2012, background): “There is no evidence, however, that the number of non-key items in the list affects the difference between the direct response and list randomization estimates, implying that we can gain relatively accurate estimates from lists of three, four, five, or six items (Tsuchiya et al., 2007).”
- When to Worry about Sensitivity Bias: A Social Reference Theory and Evidence from 30 Years of List Experiments (2020, background): “) Study Sensitive Item Polarity Direct List N Tsuchiya et al. (2007) Havemade a blood donation Over 0.”
- Statistical Analysis of List Experiments (2012, methodology): “…Cobb, and Gilens 1997a; Kuklinski et al. 1997b; Sniderman and Carmines 1997; Gilens, Sniderman, and Kuklinski 1998; Kane, Craig, and Wald 2004; Tsuchiya, Hirai, and Ono 2007; Streb et al. 2008; Corstange 2009; Flavin and Keane 2009; Glynn 2010; Gonzalez-Ocantos et al. Authors’ note: Financial…”