1. Questionnaire Scales
Dr. Michael R. Hyman, NMSU

2. Researchers Can Develop a Broad Range of Scales

3. …Although It Never Hurts to Be Creative…

4. Precise Language is Important

5. Different Ways to Ask Same Question Can Yield Different Responses

9. Classification of Scaling Techniques
Paired
Comparison

10. Non-comparative (Monadic) Rating Scales
Non-comparative Rating Scales ask about a single concept
Now that you’ve had your automobile for about 1 year, please tell us how satisfied you are with its engine power and pickup.
Completely Very Fairly Well Somewhat Very
Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied

11. TOO MUCH ABOUT RIGHT TOO LITTLE
Comparative Rating Scales
Comparative Rating Scales ask respondents to rate a concept by comparing it to a benchmark
Please indicate how the amount of authority in your present position compares with the amount of authority that would be ideal for this position.
TOO MUCH ABOUT RIGHT TOO LITTLE

12. Non-comparative Scales

13. Likert Item for Measuring Attitudes toward Tennis
It is more fun to play a tough, competitive tennis match than to play an easy one.
___Strongly Agree
___Agree
___Not Sure
___Disagree
___Strongly Disagree

17. Method of Summated Ratings: Likert Scales
Popular way to measure attitudes
Respondents indicate their (or another person’s) attitudes by checking how strongly they (or another person would) agree or disagree with statements.
Typical response alternatives: Strongly agree, Agree, Uncertain, Disagree, and Strongly disagree

19. Data for Likert-type Items

22. Thurstone Scales

23. Data for Thurstone Scaling

24. Data for Thurstone Scaling: Percentages

25. Cumulative Proportions and Q-values

26. Psychometric Graph: Trace Line

27. Semantic Differential (SD) Scale
Series of bipolar rating scales
Bipolar adjectives, such as “good” and “bad”, anchor the scale ends (or poles)
A number is assigned to each position on the scale
Proper SD scales assume three underlying attitudinal dimensions that everyone, regardless of culture or language, uses to evaluate things in their social environment: Evaluation, Power, and Activity

28. SD Scales for Measuring Attitudes Toward Tennis
Exciting ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : Calm
Interesting ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : Dull
Simple ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ Complex
Passive ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ : ___ Active

32. Least-Preferred Co-Worker Scale

33. Limitations of SD Scales
Respondents will misuse
Don’t read instructions and unfamiliar with SD scales
Difficult to construct
Limited to only a few words
Negation not necessarily opposite
Not black, which includes all colors, is not opposite of black
No advantage relative to Likert scales

34. Profile Analysis Examples

35. Image Profile of Major vs. Commuter Airlines

36. Image Profile for Color Televisions

37. Image Profile for a Savings Bank

38. Limitations of Profile Analysis
Few brands can be depicted
Attributes are non-independent
Profiles not weighted by attribute importance

39. Stapel Scales
Modern versions substitute a single adjective for bipolar adjectives of SD scales
Advantages, disadvantages, and results similar to SD, but Stapel scales easier to conduct and administer

41. Stapel Scales for Kmart

42. Stapel Scale for Compact Cars

43. Formatting Issues for Non-comparative Scales
Recommendation
Verbal category descriptions
Number of categories
Balanced or unbalanced
Odd or even categories
Forced or non-forced choice
Use precise descriptions for each category
At least 4, but typically 5 to 9 categories
Balanced unless known that respondents’ attitudes are unbalanced (e.g., all favorable)
Odd if respondents could be neutral or indifferent
Non-forced unless likely all respondents will know about issue

44. Examples of Different Formats

45. Development of a Multi-item Scale

46. Purchase Intentions Scale

47. Response Alternatives to a Purchase Intent Question

48. Graphic Rating Scales
Presents respondents with a graphic continuum

54. Graphic Rating Scale

56. Comparative Scales

57. Paired Comparison Scales
Respondents presented with two objects at a time and asked to pick the one they prefer
Ranking objects with respect to one attribute easy with only a few objects, but as number of objects increases, number of comparisons increases geometrically—(n*(n -1)/2)
If number of comparisons too great, respondents may fatigue and no longer carefully discriminate

60. Ranking Scales

62. Rank Order Data

63. Tabulated Rank Order Data

64. Constant Sum Scales

66. Constant Sum Scale

69. Q Sort

72. Other Scales

73. Dollar Metric Scale

78. Using Importance Measurement to Drive Product Improvements
Source: AMA Best Practice Webcasts
Sponsored by:  Maritz Research
Webcast Date: September 9, 2004
Time: 56 minutes
Presenter: Keith Chrzan, VP—Marketing Sciences, Maritz Research
Click here for free webcast (you’ll need to register on the AMA site; statistical analysis toward end somewhat advanced)