השוואת שיטות

	Anchoring Vignettes	Vignette Experiment
תחום	Political Science	Political Science
משפחה	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
שנת המקור	2004	—
הוגה השיטה	Gary King, Christopher Murray, Joshua Salomon & Ajay Tandon	Survey and social-psychological research traditions
סוג	Survey measurement-correction method	Randomized experiment using short described scenarios
מקור מכונן	King, G., Murray, C. J. L., Salomon, J. A., & Tandon, A. (2004). Enhancing the Validity and Cross-Cultural Comparability of Measurement in Survey Research. American Political Science Review, 98(1), 191–207.	Atzmüller, C., & Steiner, P. M. (2010). Experimental Vignette Studies in Survey Research. Methodology, 6(3), 128–138.
כינויים	King anchoring vignettes, Vignette anchoring method, DIF correction via vignettes, Anchoring vignette rescaling	Vignette study, Experimental vignette, Scenario experiment, Text-vignette experiment
קשורות	3	3
תקציר	Anchoring vignettes are a survey method for making self-assessments comparable across people and cultures. When respondents are asked to rate their own political efficacy, health, or freedom on an ordinal scale, different groups interpret the scale differently — what one culture calls 'a lot of freedom' another calls 'some.' This differential item functioning makes raw self-reports incomparable. The method, introduced by King, Murray, Salomon, and Tandon in 2004, has each respondent also rate several hypothetical characters described identically to everyone, then uses those vignette ratings to recover where each respondent's own scale lies and to rescale their self-assessment onto a common metric.	A vignette experiment presents respondents with a short, carefully constructed description of a person, situation, or scenario — a vignette — in which one or more features are experimentally manipulated, and then asks for a judgment, attitude, or intended action. By randomizing which version of the scenario each respondent reads, the researcher isolates the causal effect of each manipulated feature on the elicited judgment, combining the realism of a concrete scenario with the causal leverage of an experiment.