A law of comparative judgment.

By L. Thurstone. 1994

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Best-Worst Scaling More Reliable than Rating Scales: A Case Study on Sentiment Intensity Annotation (2017, methodology): “Paired Comparisons (Thurstone, 1927; David, 1963) is a comparative annotation method, where respondents are presented with pairs of items and asked which item has more of the property of interest (for example, which is more positive).”
Comparison of best–worst and hedonic scaling for the measurement of consumer wine preferences (2009, result): “For hedonic rating, a comparison of results from several cluster methods (hierarchical methods, K-means, latent class cluster models) found strong evidence of inter-individual differences in scale usage, as has been previously shown by Yeh et al. (1998), Cox et al.”
An Integrated Model of Application, Admission, Enrollment, and Financial Aid (2006, methodology): “…of Student Choice Random utility models (RUM) have been used to study issues as disparate as developing measurement scales for comparative judgment (Thurstone, 1927), mathematical psychology (Marschak, DeGroot, & Integrated Model of Student Choice 385 Becker, 1963), transportation-mode choices…”
An experimental investigation of violations of transitivity in choice under uncertainty (2008, result): “The error theory of Hey and Orme (1994) assumes an additive error component, as is assumed in models of Thurstone (1927), Luce (1959; 1994), Busemeyer and Townsend (1993), and others.”
75 Years After Likert: Thurstone Was Right! (2010, background): “In a series of remarkable papers in the late 1920s, Louis Thurstone asserted ‘‘Attitudes can be measured’’ (1928); see also Thurstone (1927, 1929).”
The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity (2010, background): “As Keane (1997a, b) discusses, the traditional multinomial logit (MNL) of McFadden (1974) and multinomial probit (MNP) of Thurstone (1927) have an asymmetric heterogeneity structure, because they can be motivated by assuming consumers have heterogeneous tastes for unobserved (or unmeasured/intangi”
Stochastic Choice and Preferences for Randomization (2017, unknown): “…is stochastic suggests that the subject’s utility changes because of changes in exogenous, unobservable subjective and objective conditions, such as informa- 3 See Thurstone (1927), Luce (1959), Becker et al. (1963b), Harsanyi (1973), Falmagne (1978), Cohen(1980), Barberá andPattanaik…”
Evidencias sobre la validez de contenido: avances teóricos y métodos para su estimación (2013, background): “A pesar de la importancia de este posible sesgo, son escasos los métodos objetivos desarrollados para evitar este problema, siendo las combinaciones binarias de Thurstone (1927), uno de los más adecuados a nivel práctico.”