Comparar métodos
Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.
| Anchoring Vignettes× | Vignette Experiment× | |
|---|---|---|
| Área | Political Science | Political Science |
| Família | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Ano de origem≠ | 2004 | — |
| Autor original≠ | Gary King, Christopher Murray, Joshua Salomon & Ajay Tandon | Survey and social-psychological research traditions |
| Tipo≠ | Survey measurement-correction method | Randomized experiment using short described scenarios |
| Fonte seminal≠ | 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. DOI ↗ | Atzmüller, C., & Steiner, P. M. (2010). Experimental Vignette Studies in Survey Research. Methodology, 6(3), 128–138. DOI ↗ |
| Outros nomes | King anchoring vignettes, Vignette anchoring method, DIF correction via vignettes, Anchoring vignette rescaling | Vignette study, Experimental vignette, Scenario experiment, Text-vignette experiment |
| Relacionados | 3 | 3 |
| Resumo≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de dados ↗ |
|
|