Comparison of the Quality of Assessments Using Continuous and Discrete Ordinal Rating Scales

By E. Svensson. 2000

123 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Repairing the Cracked Foundation: A Survey of Obstacles in Evaluation Practices for Generated Text (2022, neutral): “ous and discrete rating scales and found that both lead to similar results, but raters preferred continuous scales, consistent with prior findings (Svensson, 2000).”
How to factor-analyze your data right: do’s, don’ts, and how-to’s. (2010, methodology): “Next, researchers use the generated pool of items to collect quantitative data (i.e., interval data or ordinal data with a sufficiently large number of scale points; see Gaito, 1980; Svensson, 2000).”
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Visual Analog Scales (2006, unknown): “ Svensson (2000) draws a key distinction between VAS and GRS.”
Discrete vs. Continuous Rating Scales for Language Evaluation in NLP (2011, methodology): “Here, the verbal descriptors are aligned along the line of a VAS and the endpoints are typically unmarked (Svensson, 2000).”
Eliciting Willingness to Pay without Bias using Follow-up Certainty Statements: Comparisons between Probably/Definitely and a 10-point Certainty Scale (2009, unknown): “6 Svensson (2000) notes that rating scales have been used for many years in many contexts.”