IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bbz/fcpbbr/v16y2019i1p16-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vignettes: a data collection technique to handle the differential operation of items in surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio Sergio Silva

    (Universidade de São Paulo)

  • Wilerson Lucas Campos-Silva

    (Universidade de São Paulo)

  • Maria Aparecida Gouvea

    (Universidade de São Paulo)

  • Milton Carlos Farina

    (Universidade Municipal de São Caetano do Sul)

Abstract

Vignettes are scenarios used in many areas of academic research, whose main application is related to situations in which judgments about people are subject to biases or distortions. Despite the wide use of vignettes in surveys, the recommendations for their creation are limited in the literature. Thus, this study aims to review and describe criteria presented in the literature for robust textualization of vignettes. This study presents a literature review on the use of vignettes and describes a minimum set of criteria (plausibility, clarity, simplicity, content validity and analogy between the vignette and the construct) for the judicious application of this methodology. They have presented four vignettes constructed from the literature review and validated by panel of experts, with the purpose of capturing the perception of respondents on the protagonists’ actions in scenarios about co-creation value in a health service. In this way, the study conceives the essential elements for the development of this methodology.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio Sergio Silva & Wilerson Lucas Campos-Silva & Maria Aparecida Gouvea & Milton Carlos Farina, 2019. "Vignettes: a data collection technique to handle the differential operation of items in surveys," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 16(1), pages 16-31, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bbz:fcpbbr:v:16:y:2019:i:1:p16-31
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://bbronline.com.br/index.php/bbr/article/download/505/764
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hana Voňková & Patrick Hullegie, 2011. "Is the anchoring vignette method sensitive to the domain and choice of the vignette?," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 597-620, July.
    2. Heverly, Mary Ann & Fitt, David X. & Newman, Frederick L., 1984. "Constructing case vignettes for evaluating clinical judgment : An empirical model," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 45-55, January.
    3. Winsor, Tahlia & McLean, Sara, 2016. "Residential group care workers' recognition of depression: Assessment of mental health literacy using clinical vignettes," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 132-138.
    4. King, Gary & Wand, Jonathan, 2007. "Comparing Incomparable Survey Responses: Evaluating and Selecting Anchoring Vignettes," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 46-66, January.
    5. John R. Rossiter, 2011. "Measurement for the Social Sciences," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-1-4419-7158-6, February.
    6. Chou, Mabel C. & Chua, Geoffrey A. & Teo, Chung-Piaw, 2010. "On range and response: Dimensions of process flexibility," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 711-724, December.
    7. Schneeweiss, Ch. & Schneider, H., 1999. "Measuring and designing flexibility as a generalized service degree," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 98-106, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Özcureci Berker & Tuğrul Tuğba, 2023. "The Interplay Between Risk Framing, Attitude toward Policy, Negative Affect and Hard Policy Support," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 17(1), pages 122-128, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhiyong Huang & Haoxian Wang & Wenyuan Zheng, 2021. "An extended hierarchical ordered probit model robust to heteroskedastic vignette perceptions with an application to functional limitation assessment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Jones, Lindsey & d'Errico, Marco, 2019. "Whose resilience matters? Like-for-like comparison of objective and subjective evaluations of resilience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    3. William H. Greene & Mark N. Harris & Rachel J. Knott & Nigel Rice, 2021. "Specification and testing of hierarchical ordered response models with anchoring vignettes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 31-64, January.
    4. Ahrholdt, Dennis C. & Gudergan, Siegfried P. & Ringle, Christian M., 2019. "Enhancing loyalty: When improving consumer satisfaction and delight matters," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 18-27.
    5. Renske Kok & Mauricio Avendano & Teresa Bago d’Uva & Johan Mackenbach, 2012. "Can Reporting Heterogeneity Explain Differences in Depressive Symptoms Across Europe?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 191-210, January.
    6. Laura Rossouw, 2015. "Poor Health Reporting: Do Poor South Africans Underestimate Their Health Needs?," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2015-027, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2011. "Education‐related inequity in healthcare with heterogeneous reporting of health," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 639-664, July.
    8. Jorge E. Araña & Carmelo J. León, 2012. "Scale-perception bias in the valuation of environmental risks," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(20), pages 2607-2617, July.
    9. Dolnicar, Sara & Juvan, Emil, 2019. "Drivers of plate waste," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Hendrik Jürges & Arthur Soest, 2012. "Comparing the Well-Being of Older Europeans: Introduction," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 187-190, January.
    11. Daniel Kaufmann & Aart Kraay, 2008. "Governance Indicators: Where Are We, Where Should We Be Going?," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 23(1), pages 1-30, January.
    12. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, 2021. "To Blow or Not to Blow the Whistle: The Role of Rationalization in the Perceived Seriousness of Threats and Wrongdoing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 517-535, March.
    13. Edwards, Rebecca & Gibson, Rachael & Harmon, Colm P. & Schurer, Stefanie, 2020. "First in Their Families at University: Can Non-cognitive Skills Compensate for Social Origin?," IZA Discussion Papers 13721, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. David Madden, 2015. "Health and Wealth on the Roller-Coaster: Ireland, 2003–2011," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 387-412, April.
    15. Franco Peracchi & Claudio Rossetti, 2013. "The heterogeneous thresholds ordered response model: identification and inference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(3), pages 703-722, June.
    16. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, Ada & van Praag, Bernard M. S. & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2011. "Vignette Equivalence and Response Consistency: The Case of Job Satisfaction," IZA Discussion Papers 6174, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Jones, Lindsey & D'Errico, Marco, 2019. "Whose resilience matters?: like-for-like comparisons of objective and subjective measures of resilience," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 101529, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Raskina, Yulia & Podkorytova, Olga & Kuchakov, Ruslan, 2022. "Health determinants and the reporting heterogeneity bias in Russia: Anchoring vignettes approach," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 66, pages 118-143.
    19. Ahlert, Klaus-Henning & Corsten, Hans & Gössinger, Ralf, 2009. "Capacity management in order-driven production networks--A flexibility-oriented approach to determine the size of a network capacity pool," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 430-441, April.
    20. Timothy C. Y. Chan & Douglas Fearing, 2019. "Process Flexibility in Baseball: The Value of Positional Flexibility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1642-1666, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bbz:fcpbbr:v:16:y:2019:i:1:p16-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Lasso (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fucapbr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.