| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Opinion Quarterly 55:570-582 (1991)
© 1991 American Association for Public Opinion Research
RATING SCALES NUMERIC VALUES MAY CHANGE THE MEANING OF SCALE LABELS
program director at ZUMA and Privatdozent of psychology at the University of Heidelberg
research associate at ZUMA
project director at ZUMA
founder and director of the Institute für Demoskopie Allensbach, and professor emeritus of mass communication at the University of Mainz
assistant professor of psychology at Purdue University
Three experiments indicate that the numeric values provided as part of a rating scale may influence respondents' interpretation of the endpoint labels. In experiment 1, a representative sample of German adults rated their success in life along an 11-point rating scale, with the endpoints labeled "not at all successful" and "extremely successful." When the numeric values ranged from 0 ("not at all successful") to 10 ("extremely successful"), 34 percent of the respondents endorsed values between 0 and 5. However, only 13 percent endorsed formally equivalent values between –5 and 0, when the scale ranged from –5 ("not at all successful") to +5 ("extremely successful"). Experiment 2 provided an extended conceptual replication of this finding, and experiment 3 demonstrates that recipients of a respondent's report draw different inferences from formally equivalent but numerically different values. In combination, the findings indicate that respondents use the numeric values to disambiguate the meaning of scale labels, resulting in different interpretations and, accordingly, different subjective scale anchors.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  D. C. Rivers, A. W. Meade, and W. Lou Fuller Examining Question and Context Effects in Organization Survey Data Using Item Response Theory Organizational Research Methods, July 1, 2009; 12(3): 529 - 553. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. Malhotra, J. A. Krosnick, and R. K. Thomas Optimal Design of Branching Questions to Measure Bipolar Constructs Public Opin Q, June 1, 2009; 73(2): 304 - 324. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. M. Christian, N. L. Parsons, and D. A. Dillman Designing Scalar Questions for Web Surveys Sociological Methods Research, February 1, 2009; 37(3): 393 - 425. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Toepoel, M. Das, and A. Van Soest Effects of Design in Web Surveys: Comparing Trained and Fresh Respondents Public Opin Q, December 1, 2008; 72(5): 985 - 1007. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. C. M. Lam and M. Kolic Effects of Semantic Incompatibility on Rating Response Applied Psychological Measurement, May 1, 2008; 32(3): 248 - 260. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y. Poria, A. Reichel, and A. Biran Heritage Site Perceptions and Motivations to Visit Journal of Travel Research, February 1, 2006; 44(3): 318 - 326. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. M. Christian and D. A. Dillman The Influence of Graphical and Symbolic Language Manipulations on Responses to Self-Administered Questions Public Opin Q, March 1, 2004; 68(1): 57 - 80. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Dykema, K. Bergbower, J. D. Doctora, and C. Peterson An Attributional Style Questionnaire for General Use Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, June 1, 1996; 14(2): 100 - 108. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|