"John Uebersax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> A recent question made me realize the extent of ambiguity in the use
> of "Likert scale" and related terms. I'd like to see things be more
> clear. Here are my thoughts (I don't claim they are correct; they're
> just a starting point for discussion). Concise responses are
> encouraged. If there are enough, I'll post a summary.
>
> 3. I do not know if Likert also used a visual analog format such as:
>
> neither
> strongly mildly agree nor mildly strongly
> disagree disagree disagree agree agree
>
> 1 2 3 4 5
> +---------+----------+----------+---------+
My understanding of the use of visual analog scales is that only the anchors
are labelled - so that you have a line like so:
strongly disagree
strongly agree
|_______________________________________|
And you make sure that the line is easily divisible (e.g. make it 10 cm
long) so that you measure where the respondent's line response cuts your
line. I was also under the impression that this constructs a ratio scale as
you can perform mathematical operations on the distance and your left hand
anchor constitutes the zero point. My example above may not be ideal for
demonstrating this, I was wanting to work with your illustration.
cheers
Michelle
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
