Why People Change Their Answers in Sensitive Surveys When Others Are Around: CID Faculty Research Insights

How does the presence of others affect people's tendency to give socially acceptable answers to sensitive political survey questions, and what are the implications for interpreting the results accurately?

A recent paper by CID Faculty Affiliate Mashail Malik and co-author Niloufer Siddiqui examines how the presence of known third parties—such as family members, friends, or neighbors—during in-person surveys influences responses to politically sensitive questions. Using data from an original survey conducted in Karachi, Pakistan, the authors investigate whether respondents express stronger support for ethnic politics and report higher perceived ethnic discrimination when others are present. Their findings suggest that social desirability bias, likely driven by in-group solidarity norms, plays a significant role in shaping survey responses. 

Key Findings:

• Third party presence increases support for ethnic politics: Respondents interviewed in the presence of others were more likely to endorse ethnocentric political views, such as believing coethnic politicians best represent their interests or that ethnic parties protect their communities. They were also more likely to express concerns about ethnic discrimination.
• Social desirability bias as a key mechanism: The effect of third-party presence is strongest for questions about group rights and ethnic political representation rather than personal ethnic identity, suggesting that respondents may feel compelled to conform to in-group norms when others are listening.
• Larger impact than enumerator characteristics: While previous research has shown that enumerator ethnicity can influence survey responses, this study finds that third-party presence has a larger and more consistent effect on ethnocentric responses than enumerator coethnicity.
• Robustness across multiple tests: The findings hold across various robustness checks, including logistic regressions, sensitivity analyses, and corrections for multiple comparisons. 

Policy Impact and Relevance:

This study has significant implications for both the study of ethnic politics and survey methodology. The findings suggest that ethnic political attitudes may be more context-dependent than previously recognized, shaped not just by instrumental political calculations but also by immediate social environments. This aligns with a broader literature on the role of social pressure in shaping political behavior, showing that people may exaggerate their support for ethnic parties when they feel observed by coethnics. 
 
The research also underscores the need for survey researchers to account for third-party presence as a potential source of bias, especially in politically sensitive topics. Many surveys conducted in the developing world involve face-to-face interviews in non-private settings, yet third-party effects remain understudied. Rather than trying to eliminate this common feature of survey environments, researchers should systematically document and analyze how it shapes responses. 
 
More broadly, these findings contribute to debates about social norms, identity politics, and public opinion formation in multiethnic societies. If expressions of ethnic solidarity are amplified in group settings but less salient in private, this may have important implications for understanding the conditions under which ethnic politics thrive and when individuals may be more willing to express cross-ethnic cooperation or fluid identities.