Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used

By J. Dawes. 2007

2,219 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b75b5ccdb2db7ddd8c62e74633b6ef34345cef5a

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

In Search of the Optimal Number of Response Categories in a Rating Scale (2014, background): “…view supports the claim that the number of response categories makes no meaningful differences to scales’ psychometric properties such as reliability, validity, mean scores, variation, skewness, kurtosis, and factor-analytic results (Dawes, 2008; Matell & Jacoby, 1971; Schutz & Rucker, 1975).”
Creativity, self-efficacy, and small-firm performance: the mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation (2015, methodology): “In the present study, all measurements were rescaled to a 7-point scale format using Dawes’s (2008) method and the methodology suggested by Hair et al.”
Behavioral antecedents of coopetition: A synthesis and measurement scale (2020, background): “This is useful for increasing the response rate, less confusing for interviewees (Dawes, 2008), and allows the approximation of interval-level measurement in structural modelling (Hair and Hult, 2016).”
MAILS - Meta AI Literacy Scale: Development and Testing of an AI Literacy Questionnaire Based on Well-Founded Competency Models and Psychological Change- and Meta-Competencies (2023, background): “We are aware that the use of 5-point Likert scales is often discouraged (e.g., Dawes, 2008; van Beuningen et al., 2014).”
SWOT analysis applications: An integrative literature review (2021, methodology): “Following this approach, the items were categorized on a scale of five-points and given weights according to their importance (Cinquini & Tenucci, 2010; Dawes, 2002; Dawes, 2012; Hartley & Betts, 2010).”
Value Predispositions, Mass Media, and Attitudes Toward Nanotechnology: The Interplay of Public and Experts (2011, background): “Despite this, studies have shown that the responses yielded from 5-point scales and 10-point scales differ only very slightly in terms of variation about the mean, skewness, or kurtosis, and that it is appropriate to rescale them for comparability across data (e.g., Dawes, 2008).”
Moral disengagement of hotel guest negative WOM: moral identity centrality, moral awareness, and anger. (2014, background): “Both seven-point and five-point Likert scales are very popular in survey research (Colman, Morris & Preston, 1997; Dawes, 2008).”
The comparison of estimation methods on the parameter estimates and fit indices in SEM model under 7-point Likert scale (2017, background): “Therefore, issues are not discussed which pertain to the selection of the optimal number of categories within the scale, as these issues have been profoundly described in the literature (Alwin 1992; Dawes 2008; Revilla, Saris, and Krosnick 2014; Tarka 2016).”
Development and validation of a propensity to trust scale (2013, result): “However, previous researchers found that both five- and seven-point scales resulted in similar statistical outcomes (Dawes, 2008).”
Green Hotel Selection of Chinese Consumers: A Planned Behavior Perspective (2018, background): “According to Dawes (2008), a five or seven-point Likert scale will be more likely produce slightly higher mean scores within the highest possible attainable score, compared with a ten-point Likert scale, as well as being able to make comparing data a much easier process.”
Sketch-Based Image Retrieval: Benchmark and Bag-of-Features Descriptors (2011, background): “Research on the effect of scales on the outcome of experiments found no statistical difference between 5- and 7-point scales [31].”