Research on rape is handicapped by a paucity of accurate information on frequency of rape. The randomized response technique (RR), designed to produce reliable information in surveys of sensitive issues, is advocated as a means of uncovering true frequencies. RR surveys were conducted on initial and replication samples of undergraduate baccalaureate nursing students (total n = 292) and 76 graduate nursing students. The estimates of prevalence of rape victimization were 15.1% in the initial and 12.1% in the replication samples, with the difference not significant (z = 1.25, p > .05). The findings are discussed in the context of results from traditional surveys.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrownmillerS. (1976). Against our will.New York: Bantam Books
2.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1974). Crime in the United States. Uniform crime reports, 1973.Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office
3.
FidlerD. S.KleinknechtR. E. (1977). Randomized response versus direct questioning: Two data-collection methods for sensitive information.Psychological Bulletin, 84, 1045–1049
4.
GreenbergB. G.AbernathyJ. R.HorvitzD. G. (1970). A new survey technique and its application in the field of public health.Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 48, 39–55
5.
GreenbergB. G.KueblerR. R.AbernathyJ. R.HorvitzD. G. (1971). Application of the randomized response technique in obtaining quantitative data.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 66, 243–250
6.
HolmstromL. L.BurgessA. (1978). The victim of rape: Institutional reactions.New York: Wiley
7.
HorvitzD. G.ShahB. V.SimmonsW. R. (1967). The unrelated question randomized response model. Proceedings of the social statistics section of the American Statistical Association (pp. 65–72). Washington, DC: American Statistical Association
8.
HurschC. J. (1977). The trouble with rape.Chicago: Nelson-Hall
9.
JohnsonA. G. (1980). On the prevalence of rape in the United States. Signs:Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 6, 136–146
10.
KatzS.MazurM. A. (1979). Understanding the rape victim.New York: Wiley
11.
KrotkiK.FoxB. (1974). The randomized response technique, the interview, and the self-administered questionnaire: An empirical comparison of fertility reports. Proceedings of the social statistics section of the American Statistical Association (pp. 367–371). Washington, DC: American Statistical Association
12.
LankeJ. (1975). On the choice of the unrelated question in Simmons' version of randomized response.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 80–83
13.
MoorsJ. J. (1971). Optimization of the unrelated question randomized response model.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 66, 627–629
14.
RussellD. E.HowellN. (1983). The prevalence of rape in the United States revised. Signs:Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 8, 688–695
15.
SoekenK. L.MacreadyG. B. (1982). Respondents' perceived protection when using randomized response.Psychological Bulletin, 92, 487–489
16.
StoraskaF. (1975). How to say no to a rapist… and survive.New York: Random House
17.
TracyP. E.FoxJ. A. (1981). The validity of randomized response for sensitive measurements.American Sociological Review, 46, 187–200
18.
WarnerS. L. (1965). Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60, 63–69
