Berman, J. , McCombs, H., & Boruch, R.Notes on the contamination method: Two small experiments in assuring confidentiality of responses. Sociological Methods and Research, 1977, 6, 45-62.
2.
Boruch, R.Relations among statistical methods for assuring confidentiality of social research data . Social Science Research, 1972, 1, 403-414.
3.
Erikson, S.A new model for randomized response . International Statistical Review, 1973, 41, 101-113.
4.
Horwitz, R. , Greenberg, B., & Abernathy, J.Randomized response technique. In H. Sinaiko & L. Broedling (Eds.), Perspectives on attitude assessment. Champaign, IL: Pendelton, 1976.
5.
Jones, E. , & Sigall, H.The bogus pipeline: A new paradigrn for measuring affect and attitude. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 76, 349-364.
6.
Kim, J. , & Flueck, J.A review of randomized response models and some new results. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association Social Statistics Section, 1976.
7.
Milgram, S. , Mann, L., & Harter, S.The lost-letter technique: A tool of social research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1965, 29, 437-438.
8.
Locander, W. , Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N.An investigation of interview method: Two small experiments in assuring confidentiality of responses. Sociological Methods and Research, 1976, 71, 269-275.
9.
Shotland, R. L.The lost-letter technique: Some methodological considerations . JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 1978, 8, ms. 1640.
10.
Warner, S.Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1965, 60, 63-69.
