MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2394734898 · doi:10.1177/0020852315618018

The mystery shopper: a tool to measure public service delivery?

2016· article· en· W2394734898 on OpenAlexaff
Steve Jacob, Nathalie Schiffino, Benjamin Biard

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Administrative Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic sectorAccountabilityPublic relationsCustomer satisfactionPrivate sectorService delivery frameworkBusinessQuality (philosophy)Service (business)MarketingPolitical scienceEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Originally the exclusive preserve of the private sector, the mystery shopper technique is increasingly being used in the public sector. In the wake of the reforms to modernise the state, accountability and performance-monitoring exercises are on the rise. They focus, in particular, on service quality and user-customer satisfaction. The article makes a twofold contribution to this topic: methodological and substantive. First of all, the article undertakes a scoping review of the literature on the mystery shopper. This review makes it possible to present the mystery shopper technique and its use in the public sector. For this bibliometric study, a sample of 34 papers was analysed. Second, the article offers a summary of the research into the mystery shopper technique, its potential and its limitations. Points for practitioners This article describes the use of the mystery shopper technique in the public sector. The areas for which mystery shopper surveys are commissioned are relatively limited, most being undertaken in the health sector. However, the scoping review emphasises the potential importance of mystery shopping for the purposes of the evaluation. As such, investigating other areas can be very interesting and promising for the public authorities. We also observe from this literature review that the challenges identified during mystery shopper studies can be overcome.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Administrative SciencesSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207