+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

In Pursuit of Anchoring Vignettes That Work: Evaluating Generality Versus Specificity in Vignette Texts

In Pursuit of Anchoring Vignettes That Work: Evaluating Generality Versus Specificity in Vignette Texts

Journals of Gerontology. Series B Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 73(1): 54-63

Anchoring vignettes appear with growing frequency in surveys of health and aging, but little research investigates how to optimize their wording. This study experimentally tests whether mentioning specific health conditions and/or medical procedures enhances or undermines vignette validity. Three series of general health anchoring vignettes were fielded to 2,550 respondents in the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study: one mentioning no specific health conditions or procedures, one mentioning heart disease-related ones, and one mentioning diabetes-related ones. Variations on hierarchical ordered probit models were used to test whether vignette wording affected adherence to the key measurement assumptions of vignette equivalence (VE) and response consistency (RC). While all vignette series showed substantial violations of VE, violations were larger (especially by sex and education) when using disease-specific texts. RC violations appeared relatively minor, but somewhat larger in disease-specific texts. These findings suggest that more general, universal vignette texts may be preferable to ones describing highly specific conditions/procedures. The common advice to prioritize specificity and concreteness in survey texts may be misguided if sociodemographic groups differ in their familiarity or associations with the presented details. Anchoring vignettes are a potentially useful survey tool, but further efforts are needed to optimize their wording.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 059865580

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 28475695

DOI: 10.1093/geronb/gbx048

Related references

Are anchoring vignettes ratings sensitive to vignette age and sex?. Health Economics 22(1): 1-13, 2013

Evaluating reporting heterogeneity in self-rated health among adults aged 50 years and above in India: an anchoring vignettes analytic approach. Journal of Aging and Health 26(6): 1015-1031, 2014

Anchoring vignettes in the Health and Retirement Study: how do medical professionals and disability recipients characterize the severity of work limitations?. Plos one 10(5): E0126218, 2015

Specificity versus generality of motor response consistency. Journal of Motor Behavior 1(1): 45-52, 1969

Generality versus specificity of attitudes towards people with disabilities. British Journal of Medical Psychology 64(1): 55-64, 1991

Domain generality versus modality specificity: the paradox of statistical learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19(3): 117-125, 2015

Generality versus Specificity of Problem Behavior: Psychological and Functional Differences. Journal of Drug Issues 24(1): 55-74, 1994

Specificity versus generality in static strength performance: review of the literature. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 52(8): 371-375, 1971

Impulsivity, emotion regulation, and developmental psychopathology: specificity versus generality of linkages. Annals of the new York Academy of Sciences 1008: 149-159, 2003

Assessing Self-Regulation in Individuals With Visual Impairments: Generality Versus Specificity in Self-Regulatory Functioning. Assessment for Effective Intervention 37(3): 171-182, 2012

Generality versus specificity: A comparison of dynamic and isometric measures of strength and speed-strength. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology 68(4): 350-355, 1994

Anchoring Vignettes in EQ-5D-5L Questionnaire: Validation of a New Instrument. Open Nursing Journal 11: 144-156, 2017

Domain-generality versus domain-specificity in cognition. Sternberg, R J The nature of cognition 137-172, 1999

Promises and Pitfalls of Anchoring Vignettes in Health Survey Research. Demography 52(5): 1703-1728, 2015

Anchoring vignettes for health comparisons: an analysis of response consistency. Quality of Life Research 23(6): 1721-1731, 2014