Creating scripted video-vignettes in an experimental study on two empathic processes in oncology: Reflections on our experience

Objective: The aims were to: (1) apply the guidelines to develop and test the validity of video-vignettes manipulating empathy and context in oncology; (2) compare lay people's and patients' assessments of validity; (3) reflecting on our experiment Methods: Guidelines were followed: (1) deciding whether video-vignettes were appropriate; (2) developing a valid script; (3) designing valid manipulations; (4) converting the scripted consultations into videos. One hundred sixteen lay people and 46 cancer patients filled in the Video Engagement Scale, the CARE, and ad hoc questionnaires on realism and emotions. Results: The video-vignettes are valid for experimental use. Differences appeared in the emotions participants reported. The empathic processes were successfully manipulated and perceived. Lay people's and patients' assessments were equivalent, except for video-vignettes in neutral consultations. Participants' comments on nonverbal behavior, camera perspective, scripts and empathy assessment were reported. Conclusion: Patients' assessments are impacted by their personal experiences. Researchers should control for this in analogue patient studies. Practice implications: Based on this experience, we reflect on: (1) adopting congruent nonverbal behavior throughout the video-vignettes; (2) alternating camera perspectives; (3) avoiding the sole use of written scripts; (4) using quantitative and qualitative analysis to validate scripts and video-vignettes. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

The study aimed to develop and test the validity of video-vignettes manipulating empathy and context in oncology, with results showing that these video-vignettes are valid for experimental use. Differences in assessments of validity were found between lay people and patients in some cases. The study also found that patients' assessments are impacted by their personal experiences, suggesting the need for researchers to control for this in analog patient studies.