Some thoughts on Likert-type scales
By J. Hartley. 2014
209 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Many articles published in the International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology describe the results obtained in studies that have used Likert-type scales. Such scales have advantages and disadvantages and in this article I comment on some of these. In particular I comment on the effects of using scales that start with the positive end and finish with the negative one, and on those that present high ratings on the left - as opposed to the right. I also consider that scores on negatively-worded items differ from those obtained on positively-worded ones and that it is not, therefore, appropriate to simply reverse the scores obtained on such items. Finally, I note that some items on these scales present more than one issue and it is hard to know whether when responding to these items, respondents are responding to all of the item or just one part.
Subfields: Applied Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/059f3148732784eece97199dd445f75966890dbe
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Applied Psychology
In Management Science and Operations Research
In Statistics and Probability
Citations in the corpus
- Corporate social responsibility in cruising: Using materiality analysis to create shared value (2016, background): “The questions were not hypothetical, reliant on memory, double barrelled or leading, and no question was in the negative i.e. no reverse thinking is needed (Hartley, 2014).”