| Vignette |
It does not represent the reality |
We developed a vignette using reports from the EU, information from garment sector organizations and from nonprofit organizations; we accessed CSR reports from the industry, and academic studies in operations management and the fashion areas. |
We pretested the vignettes twice to make sure that the context is understandable and measure the realism (Rungtusanatham et al., 2011Rungtusanatham, M., Wallin, C., & Eckerd, S. (2011). The vignette in a scenario-based role-playing experiment. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 47(3), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2011.03232.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2011...
). |
| Participant’s selection |
Participants who do not understand the field or who do not work in this specific field |
We used the Prolific platform to select the subjects (DuHadway et al., 2018DuHadway, S., Carnovale, S., & Kannan, V. R. (2018). Organizational communication and individual behavior: Implications for supply chain risk management. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 54(4), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12182
https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12182...
; Palan & Schitter, 2018Palan, S., & Schitter, C. (2018). Prolific.ac-A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 17, 22-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.0...
). We filtered subjects who have a management position and who have some experience in operations management. |
| Bias |
Random assignment failure (personal selection) |
Random assignment was used to reduce the likelihood of systematic between-group differences and maximize internal validity of the experiment (Huang et al.,2008Huang, X., Gattiker, T. F., & Schwarz, J. L. (2008). Interpersonal trust formation during the supplier selection process: the role of the communication channel. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 44(3), 53-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2008.00066.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2008...
). We adopted random assignment to distribute the vignette and we used software to do that, so each subject had the same chance of receiving the treatments. |
| Small sample sizes |
We selected more than 50 subjects for each cell. |
| Attention checks |
Catch inattentive subjects |
We introduced two questions for each study, and the subjects that failed to answer were eliminated (Abbey & Meloy, 2017Abbey, J. D., & Meloy, M. G. (2017). Attention by design: Using attention checks to detect inattentive respondents and improve data quality. Journal of Operations Management, 53-56(1), 63-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2017.06.001
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2017.06.00...
). |
| Manipulation checks |
Participants might answer the questions, but not understand the manipulation |
We introduced three questions for each manipulation, and we collected them three times (two in the pretest and one in the final data collection). Manipulation checks are used to identify the different levels of the manipulation and attend the convergent validity (Bachrach & Bendoly, 2011Bachrach, D. G., & Bendoly, E. (2011). Rigor in behavioral experiments: A basic primer for supply chain management researchers. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 47(3), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2011.03230.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2011...
). |
| Demand effects |
“The changes in behavior by experimental participants due to cues about what constitutes appropriate behavior” (Zizzo, 2010Zizzo, D. J. (2010). Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 13(1), 75-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-009-9230-z
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-009-9230-...
, p. 75) |
We adopted a between-subject design in both studies, and collected Study 1 and 2 separately, in order to reduce the demand effects and to improve the results (Charness et al., 2012Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 81(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2011.08.009
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2011.08.0...
). |
| We recruited and conducted the studies online, and the random assignment was used to distribute the multiple scenarios to each subject. |
| Confounding tests |
Make sure that one experimental manipulation cannot be influenced by another. |
Confounding tests were used to assess the discriminant validity of the manipulation and ensure that one experimental manipulation was not influenced by another (Perdue & Summers, 1986Perdue, B. C., & Summers, J. O. (1986). Checking the success of manipulations in marketing experiments. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(4), 317-326. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151807
https://doi.org/10.2307/3151807...
; Thomas et al., 2013Thomas, S. P., Thomas, R. W., Manrodt, K. B., & Rutner, S. M. (2013). An experimental test of negotiation strategy effects on knowledge sharing intentions in buyer-supplier relationships. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 49(2), 96-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12004
https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12004...
). |
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
