Experimental validation of specialized questioning techniques in conservation.

This applied in both countries and for all SQTs, except the bean method, suggesting that, except for the bean method, SQTs outperformed direct questions when a socially undesirable response was required (Appendix S3). Keywords: bean method; bias; crosswise model; direct questions; randomized response techniques; rule breaking; sensitivity; unmatched count technique; método bean; modelo transversal; preguntas directas; rompimiento de reglas; sensibilidad; sesgo; técnica de conteo sin par; técnicas de respuesta aleatoria; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; EN bean method bias crosswise model direct questions randomized response techniques rule breaking sensitivity unmatched count technique método bean modelo transversal preguntas directas rompimiento de reglas sensibilidad sesgo técnica de conteo sin par técnicas de respuesta aleatoria 1 15 15 10/04/22 20221001 NES 221001 INTRODUCTION Theories, frameworks, and tools from the social sciences are increasingly integrated into conservation research and practice (Bennett et al., 2017). Developed by social scientists to overcome these biases, specialized questioning techniques (SQTs) are being increasingly applied in conservation to investigate illegal behaviors (Hinsley et al., 2018; Ibbett et al., 2021). One might thus infer that UCT is superior to other SQTs tested; however, pairwise comparisons showed that UCT was not better understood than other SQTs (excluding crosswise model). [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)