IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0190393.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why rate when you could compare? Using the “EloChoice” package to assess pairwise comparisons of perceived physical strength

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew P Clark
  • Kate L Howard
  • Andy T Woods
  • Ian S Penton-Voak
  • Christof Neumann

Abstract

We introduce “EloChoice”, a package for R which uses Elo rating to assess pairwise comparisons between stimuli in order to measure perceived stimulus characteristics. To demonstrate the package and compare results from forced choice pairwise comparisons to those from more standard single stimulus rating tasks using Likert (or Likert-type) items, we investigated perceptions of physical strength from images of male bodies. The stimulus set comprised images of 82 men standing on a raised platform with minimal clothing. Strength-related anthropometrics and grip strength measurements were available for each man in the set. UK laboratory participants (Study 1) and US online participants (Study 2) viewed all images in both a Likert rating task, to collect mean Likert scores, and a pairwise comparison task, to calculate Elo, mean Elo (mElo), and Bradley-Terry scores. Within both studies, Likert, Elo and Bradley-Terry scores were closely correlated to mElo scores (all rs > 0.95), and all measures were correlated with stimulus grip strength (all rs > 0.38) and body size (all rs > 0.59). However, mElo scores were less variable than Elo scores and were hundreds of times quicker to compute than Bradley-Terry scores. Responses in pairwise comparison trials were 2/3 quicker than in Likert tasks, indicating that participants found pairwise comparisons to be easier. In addition, mElo scores generated from a data set with half the participants randomly excluded produced very comparable results to those produced with Likert scores from the full participant set, indicating that researchers require fewer participants when using pairwise comparisons.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew P Clark & Kate L Howard & Andy T Woods & Ian S Penton-Voak & Christof Neumann, 2018. "Why rate when you could compare? Using the “EloChoice” package to assess pairwise comparisons of perceived physical strength," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0190393
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190393
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0190393
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0190393&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0190393?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark E. Glickman, 1999. "Parameter Estimation in Large Dynamic Paired Comparison Experiments," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 48(3), pages 377-394.
    2. Lê, Sébastien & Josse, Julie & Husson, François, 2008. "FactoMineR: An R Package for Multivariate Analysis," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 25(i01).
    3. Birk Diedenhofen & Jochen Musch, 2015. "cocor: A Comprehensive Solution for the Statistical Comparison of Correlations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-12, April.
    4. Matthew J C Crump & John V McDonnell & Todd M Gureckis, 2013. "Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk as a Tool for Experimental Behavioral Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Carolin Strobl & Florian Wickelmaier & Achim Zeileis, 2011. "Accounting for Individual Differences in Bradley-Terry Models by Means of Recursive Partitioning," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 36(2), pages 135-153, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karin Kauer & Sandra Pärnpuu & Liina Talgre & Viacheslav Eremeev & Anne Luik, 2021. "Soil Particulate and Mineral-Associated Organic Matter Increases in Organic Farming under Cover Cropping and Manure Addition," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-23, September.
    2. Surun, Clément & Drechsler, Martin, 2018. "Effectiveness of Tradable Permits for the Conservation of Metacommunities With Two Competing Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 189-196.
    3. Jan Kluge & Sarah Lappöhn & Kerstin Plank, 2023. "Predictors of TFP growth in European countries," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 50(1), pages 109-140, February.
    4. Navarro-Miró, D. & Iocola, I. & Persiani, A. & Blanco-Moreno, J.M. & Kristensen, H. Lakkenborg & Hefner, M. & Tamm, K. & Bender, I. & Védie, H. & Willekens, K. & Diacono, M. & Montemurro, F. & Sans, F, 2019. "Energy flows in European organic vegetable systems: Effects of the introduction and management of agroecological service crops," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. Alexander Platzer & Thomas Nussbaumer & Thomas Karonitsch & Josef S Smolen & Daniel Aletaha, 2019. "Analysis of gene expression in rheumatoid arthritis and related conditions offers insights into sex-bias, gene biotypes and co-expression patterns," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-23, July.
    6. Baccar, Mariem & Raynal, Hélène & Sekhar, Muddu & Bergez, Jacques-Eric & Willaume, Magali & Casel, Pierre & Giriraj, P. & Murthy, Sanjeeva & Ruiz, Laurent, 2023. "Dynamics of crop category choices reveal strategies and tactics used by smallholder farmers in India to cope with unreliable water availability," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    7. Aditi Sahu & Kivanc Kose & Lukas Kraehenbuehl & Candice Byers & Aliya Holland & Teguru Tembo & Anthony Santella & Anabel Alfonso & Madison Li & Miguel Cordova & Melissa Gill & Christi Fox & Salvador G, 2022. "In vivo tumor immune microenvironment phenotypes correlate with inflammation and vasculature to predict immunotherapy response," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Anthony Evans & Willem Sleegers & Žan Mlakar, 2020. "Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 401-412, May.
    9. Joy R. Petway & Yu-Pin Lin & Rainer F. Wunderlich, 2019. "Analyzing Opinions on Sustainable Agriculture: Toward Increasing Farmer Knowledge of Organic Practices in Taiwan-Yuanli Township," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-27, July.
    10. Walters, William H., 2017. "Do subjective journal ratings represent whole journals or typical articles? Unweighted or weighted citation impact?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 730-744.
    11. Baker, Rose D. & McHale, Ian G., 2014. "A dynamic paired comparisons model: Who is the greatest tennis player?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(2), pages 677-684.
    12. Anne-Sophie Lambert & Catherine Legrand & Sophie Cès & Thérèse Van Durme & Jean Macq, 2019. "Evaluating case management as a complex intervention: Lessons for the future," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, October.
    13. Pabitra Joshi & Guriqbal Singh Dhillon & Yaotian Gao & Amandeep Kaur & Justin Wheeler & Jianli Chen, 2024. "An Optimal Model to Improve Genomic Prediction for Protein Content and Test Weight in a Diverse Spring Wheat Panel," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, February.
    14. Nichiforel, Liviu & Keary, Kevin & Deuffic, Philippe & Weiss, Gerhard & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Winkel, Georg & Avdibegović, Mersudin & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Feliciano, Diana & Gatto, Paola & Gorriz Mi, 2018. "How private are Europe’s private forests? A comparative property rights analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 535-552.
    15. Maude Lavanchy & Patrick Reichert & Jayanth Narayanan & Krishna Savani, 2023. "Applicants’ Fairness Perceptions of Algorithm-Driven Hiring Procedures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 125-150, November.
    16. Roopam Shukla & Ankit Agarwal & Kamna Sachdeva & Juergen Kurths & P. K. Joshi, 2019. "Climate change perception: an analysis of climate change and risk perceptions among farmer types of Indian Western Himalayas," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 103-119, January.
    17. Cholez, Celia & Pauly, Olivier & Mahdad, Maral & Mehrabi, Sepide & Giagnocavo, Cynthia & Bijman, Jos, 2023. "Heterogeneity of inter-organizational collaborations in agrifood chain sustainability-oriented innovations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    18. Munten, Pauline & Swaen, Valérie & Vanhamme, Joëlle, 2024. "Exploring rebound effects in Access-Based services (ABS)," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Loc, Ho Huu & Park, Edward & Thu, Tran Ngoc & Diep, Nguyen Thi Hong & Can, Nguyen Trong, 2021. "An enhanced analytical framework of participatory GIS for ecosystem services assessment applied to a Ramsar wetland site in the Vietnam Mekong Delta," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    20. Kathrin Leppek & Gun Woo Byeon & Wipapat Kladwang & Hannah K. Wayment-Steele & Craig H. Kerr & Adele F. Xu & Do Soon Kim & Ved V. Topkar & Christian Choe & Daphna Rothschild & Gerald C. Tiu & Roger We, 2022. "Combinatorial optimization of mRNA structure, stability, and translation for RNA-based therapeutics," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0190393. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.