Transformations to Improve Reliability and/or Validity for Affective Scales
暂无分享,去创建一个
THE psychological literature is rich with studies demonstrating that collecting responses to affective stimuli using a large number of ordered categories is not effective when compared with using some smaller number (e.g., Matell and Jacoby, 1971; Komorita and Graham, 1965). Thus, a 20-point scale is no better, and perhaps worse, in terms of reliability and validity than, say, a 5-point scale. However, these studies uniformly rank the categories and analyze these ranks. There is a small, circumscribed body of literature (Liu, 1971 ; Warren, Klonglan, and Sabri, 1969) which indicates that the use of normalized ranks or, in the case of large numbers of categories, normal deviates results in an increasing, monotonic relationship between reliability and number of categories. Such transformations weight highly response differences in the ends of the scale
[1] S. S. Komorita,et al. Number of Scale Points and the Reliability of Scales , 1965 .
[2] D. Peabody,et al. Two components in bipolar scales: direction and extremeness. , 1962, Psychological review.
[3] A. Liu. A theory-based scale for measurement of affective responses to personality and attitude inventories , 1971 .
[4] J. Jacoby,et al. Is There an Optimal Number of Alternatives for Likert Scale Items? Study I: Reliability and Validity , 1971 .