Posted by
Swank, Paul R on
Oct 18, 2011; 3:24pm
URL: http://spssx-discussion.165.s1.nabble.com/A-4-point-Likert-scale-tp4910676p4914191.html
Another issue is non-response. Sometimes when the respondent does not have an opinion on an item and they do not have a "no opinion" response option, hey will simply fail to respond to the item. As far as the analysis goes, it really depends on the distribution. If it is badly skewed, especially with small or unequal group sizes, then a standard analysis may give spurious results. In this case, I like to use bootstrapping.
Paul
Dr. Paul R. Swank,
Children's Learning Institute
Professor, Department of Pediatrics, Medical School
Adjunct Professor, School of Public Health
University of Texas Health Science Center-Houston
-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce Weaver
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 3:28 PM
To:
[hidden email]
Subject: Re: A 4 point Likert scale
Interesting guidelines, Scott. Thanks for posting. However, re items 3 and
4 (see below), my sister (to whom I sent the link) wonders how would one
distinguish between a deliberate choice to not respond and failure to notice
the item?
Cheers,
Bruce
--- from the rules of thumb ---
3. Avoid "Not Applicable" or "No Opinion" response categories. It is far
better to instruct respondents to skip irrelevant items than it is to offer
them the opportunity in every item to seem to provide data, but without
having to make a decision.
4. Avoid odd numbers of response options. Middle categories can attract
disproportionate numbers of responses. Like "Not Applicable" options, middle
categories allow respondents to appear to be providing data, but without
making a decision. If someone really cannot decide which side of an issue
they come down on, it is better to let them decide on their own to skip the
question. If the data then show that two adjacent categories turn out to be
incapable of sustaining a quantitative distinction, that evidence will be in
hand and can inform future designs.
SR Millis-3 wrote:
>
> Without knowing more about the construct you're trying to measure, it's
> difficult to provide more than some very rough guidelines:
>
> --Avoid odd numbers of response categories.
>
> --Avoid "not applicable" or "no opinion" response categories.
>
> --Consider starting with 6 categories.
>
> For more guidance:
>
http://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt203f.htm>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> Scott R Millis, PhD, ABPP, CStat, PStat®
> Professor
> Wayne State University School of Medicine
> Email: aa3379@
> Email: srmillis@
> Tel: 313-993-8085
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mohamed Fawzy Afify <mohamedfawzy74@>
> To: SPSSX-L@.UGA
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 2:26 PM
> Subject: Re: A 4 point Likert scale
>
>
> Thank� you for your help.
>
> The point is, I do not want to have a� neutral� position. This is not a
> construct.
>
> so do you suggest a 6 point scale , giving
> more� stretch� and� eliminating� the neutral status?
>
> However, I do have a construct [5 items] that was originally measured on a
> 4 point scale and I intend to use it.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Mohamed
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Art Kendall <Art@>
> To: Mohamed <mohamedfawzy74@>
> Cc: SPSSX-L@.UGA
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 8:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [SPSSX-L] A 4 point Likert scale
>
>
> Why do you want to use only a 4 point Likert scale?
> _The more you restrict the variance of a variable the more you
> restrict its possible covariance._
> As a rule of thumb you want items to approximate a continuous
> construct as much as possible given who your respondents are.
>
> An actual Likert item has 5 points SD D ? A SA.� Do you have a
> Disagree to Agree construct for your response scale?
>
> If your scale has many items, the total (mean) score might not be
> too restricted.
> If you do not have scales, but are measuring a construct with a
> single variable the restriction of variance and therefore on
> covariance is even more problematical.
>
> In short, a 4 point response scale is usually inadvisable. Why
> coarsen your measurement any more than is really necessary?
>
>
> Art Kendall
> Social Research Consultants
>
> On 10/17/2011 1:13 PM, Mohamed wrote:
> Hi I intend to use a 4 point Likert scale format in my survey. I want to
> know if this puts limitations on the type of statistical analysis
> tests conducted? Regards Mohamed --
> View this message in context:
>
http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/A-4-point-Likert-scale-tp4910676p4910676.html> Sent from the SPSSX Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to LISTSERV@.UGA
> (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
> command. To leave the list, send the command
> SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
> For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
> INFO REFCARD
>
-----
--
Bruce Weaver
[hidden email]
http://sites.google.com/a/lakeheadu.ca/bweaver/"When all else fails, RTFM."
NOTE: My Hotmail account is not monitored regularly.
To send me an e-mail, please use the address shown above.
--
View this message in context:
http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/A-4-point-Likert-scale-tp4910676p4911452.htmlSent from the SPSSX Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD
=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD