This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Literatur
Alexander, C. S., & Becker, H. J. (1978). The use of vignettes in survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42, 93–104.
Anderson, C. A., Lindsay, A. J., & Bushman, B. J. (1999). Research in the psychological laboratory: truth or triviality? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 3–9.
Arnold, M. C., Ponick, E., & Schenk-Mathes, H. Y. (2008). Groves mechanism vs. profit sharing for corporate budgeting—an experimental analysis with preplay communication. European Accounting Review, 17, 37–63.
Auspurg, K., Hinz, T., & Liebig, S. (2009). Komplexität von Vignetten, Lerneffekte und Plausibilität im Faktoriellen Survey. Methoden-Daten-Analysen, 3, 59–96.
Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W., & Weiber, R. (2003). Multivariate Analysemethoden: Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung, 10 Aufl. Berlin: Springer.
Beck, M., & Opp, K.-D. (2001). Der faktorielle Survey und die Messung von Normen. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 53, 283–306.
Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (1996). A methodological note on cross-cultural accounting ethics research. International Journal of Accounting, 31, 55–66.
Colquitt, J. A. (2008). From the editors. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 616–620.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 344–354.
Dülmer, H. (2007). Experimental plans in factorial surveys: random or quota design? Sociological Methods Research, 35, 382–409.
Eifler, S. (2007). Evaluating the validity of self-reported deviant behavior using vignette analyses. Quality & Quantity, 41, 303–318.
Groß, J., & Börensen, C. (2009). Wie valide sind Verhaltensmessungen mittels Vignetten? In P. Kriwy & C. Gross (Hrsg.), Klein aber fein! (S. 149–178). Wiesbaden: VS-Research.
Jasso, G. (2006). Factorial survey methods for studying beliefs and judgments. Sociological Methods Research, 34, 334–422.
Keppel, G., & Wickens, T. D. (2004). Design and analysis: a researcher’s handbook, 4 Aufl. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
Kuhfeld, W. F. (2005). Marketing research methods in SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. Cary: SAS Institute.
Maas, V. S., & Hartmann, F. G. H. (2010). Why business unit controllers create budget slack: involvement in management, social pressure, and machiavellianism. Erscheint in: Behavioral Research in Accounting.
Monsen, E., Patzelt, H., & Saxton, T. (2010). Beyond simple utility: incentive design and trade-offs for corporate employee-entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34, 105–130.
Moorman, R. H., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1992). A meta-analytic review and empirical test of the potential confounding effects of social desirable response sets in organizational behaviour research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65, 131–149.
Nisic, N., & Auspurg, K. (2009). Faktorieller Survey und klassische Bevölkerungsumfrage im Vergleich – Validität, Grenzen und Möglichkeiten beider Ansätze. In P. Kriwy & C. Gross (Hrsg.), Klein aber fein! Quantitative empirische Sozialforschung mit kleinen Fallzahlen (S. 211–245). Wiesbaden: VS-Research.
Perrey, J. (1996). Erhebungsdesign-Effekte bei der Conjoint-Analyse. Marketing, 18, 105–116.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method bias in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.
Rossi, P. H., & Anderson, A. B. (1982). The factorial survey approach: an introduction. In P. H. Rossi & S. L. Nock (Hrsg.), Measuring social jugements: the factorial survey approach (S. 15–67). Beverley Hills: Sage.
Rost, K., Weibel, A., & Osterloh, M. (2007). Good organizational design for bad motivational disposition. Working Paper, Universität Zürich, Zürich.
Steiner, P. M., & Atzmüller, C. (2006). Experimentelle Vignettendesigns in faktoriellen surveys. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 58, 117–148.
Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1972). Short homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191–193.
Taylor, B. J. (2006). Factorial surveys: using vignettes to study professional judgment. British Journal of Social Work, 36, 1187–1207.
Verlegh, P. W. J., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Wittink, D. R. (2002). Range and number-of-levels effects in derived and stated measures of attribute importance. Marketing Letters, 13, 41–52.
Wallander, L. (2009). 25 years of factorial surveys in sociology: a review. Social Science Research, 38, 505–520.
Weibel, A., Rost, K., & Osterloh, M. (2007). Gewollte und ungewollte Anreizwirkungen von variablen Löhnen: Disziplinierung der Agenten oder Crowding-Out? zfbf – Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, 59, 1029–1054.
Weibel, A., Rost, K., & Osterloh, M. (2010). Pay for performance in the public sector—benefits and (hidden) costs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, 387–412.
Wilks, T. (2004). The use of vignettes in qualitative research into social work values. Qualitiative Social Work, 3, 78–87.
Wittink, D. R., Krishnamurthi, L., & Reibstein, D. J. (1989). The effect of differences in the number of attribute levels on conjoint results. Marketing Letters, 1, 113–123.
Wooldridge, J. W. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kunz, J., Linder, S. ZP-Stichwort: Vignetten-Experiment. Z Plan Unternehmenssteuerung 21, 211–222 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-010-0105-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-010-0105-4