IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sgm/pzwzuw/v12i45y2014p113-136.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Konsekwencje wyboru typu skali odpowiedzi w badaniach ankietowych (Consequences of using different types of rating scales)

Author

Listed:
  • Jerzy Wierzbinski

    (Wydzial Zarzadzania, Uniwersytet Warszawski)

  • Anna O. Kuzminska

    (Wydzial Zarzadzania, Uniwersytet Warszawski)

  • Grzegorz Krol

    (Wydzial Zarzadzania, Uniwersytet Warszawski)

Abstract

The choice of the type of rating scale, made often without careful consideration, has important implications, because respondents are forced to transpose the implicit scale they use to differentiate objects, into a scale provided by the researcher. Analysis of empirical data from five studies showed that: (1) respondents have different preferences as to the length of the scale (some people prefer short {YES, NO} scales, others prefer multipoint scales), (2) the numbers of extreme responses in different measurement techniques correlate highly and positively with each other, so the preference for extreme responses can be regarded as respondent’s response style. The article also presented arguments for four theses: (1) an index constructed from responses on Likert-type scales can be treated as quantitative variables, (2) middle response category should be avoided, however, respondents should be allowed to provide “don’t know” answers, (3) “Don’t know” answer category should appear at the end of the scale - not in the middle, (4) the shape of a distribution of an index constructed from answers to multiple questions depends on the number of points in the Likert-type scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Jerzy Wierzbinski & Anna O. Kuzminska & Grzegorz Krol, 2014. "Konsekwencje wyboru typu skali odpowiedzi w badaniach ankietowych (Consequences of using different types of rating scales)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 12(45), pages 113-136.
    • Handle: RePEc:sgm:pzwzuw:v:12:i:45:y:2014:p:113-136
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://pz.wz.uw.edu.pl/sites/default/files/artykuly/pz_1_2014_wierzbinski_kuzminska_krol.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://pz.wz.uw.edu.pl/en
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chol Lee & Robert T Green, 1991. "Cross-Cultural Examination of the Fishbein Behavioral Intensions Model," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 22(2), pages 289-305, June.
    2. van Herk, H. & Poortinga, Y.H. & Verhallen, T.M.M., 2004. "Response styles in rating scales : Evidence of method bias in data from 6 EU countries," Other publications TiSEM c8befc7a-f2f4-44cf-b2fc-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    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. Anne-Wil Harzing & Michelle Brown & Kathrin Köster & Shuming Zhao, 2012. "Response Style Differences in Cross-National Research," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 341-363, June.
    2. Sergio Cesare Masin & Michele Vicovaro, 2023. "Sources of uncertainty in functional measurement methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 1185-1205, April.
    3. Robert Konopaske & Chet Robie & John M. Ivancevich, 2009. "Managerial Willingness to Assume Traveling, Short-term and Long-term Global Assignments," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 359-387, June.
    4. Lee, Jaeha & Nguyen, Minhthu Jill, 2017. "Product attributes and preference for foreign brands among Vietnamese consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 76-83.
    5. Song, Jinzhu & Drennan, Judy C. & Andrews, Lynda M., 2012. "Exploring regional differences in Chinese consumer acceptance of new mobile technology: A qualitative study," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 80-88.
    6. Andre A. Pekerti & Denni Arli, 2017. "Do Cultural and Generational Cohorts Matter to Ideologies and Consumer Ethics? A Comparative Study of Australians, Indonesians, and Indonesian Migrants in Australia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 387-404, June.
    7. Joshua B. Gilbert & Zachary Himmelsbach & James Soland & Mridul Joshi & Benjamin W. Domingue, 2024. "Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects with Item-Level Outcome Data: Insights from Item Response Theory," Papers 2405.00161, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    8. Alain Beuckelaer & Machiel Zeeman & Hans Trijp, 2015. "Assessment of the cross-national validity of an End-anchored 9-point hedonic product liking scale," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 1267-1286, May.
    9. Aurélie Bertrand & Christian Hafner, 2014. "On heterogeneous latent class models with applications to the analysis of rating scores," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 307-330, February.
    10. Sanz Blas Silvia & Ruiz Mafé Carla & Pérez Pérez Isabel, 2013. "Factores determinantes de la lealtad al proveedor de servicios turísticos online," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 58(2), pages 279-302, abril-jun.
    11. Tarnanidis, Theodore & Owusu-Frimpong, Nana & Nwankwo, Sonny & Omar, Maktoba, 2015. "A confirmatory factor analysis of consumer styles inventory: Evidence from Greece," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 164-177.
    12. Gregory Wegmann & Ivan Ruviditch, 2015. "Management in China: Cultural, institutional roots and pragmatism. An inquiry in Shanghai," Working Papers hal-01104551, HAL.
    13. Michael C. Handrinos & Dimitrios Folinas & Konstantinos Rotsios, 2015. "Using the SERVQUAL model to evaluate the quality of services for a farm school store," Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 1(1), pages 62-74.
    14. Tellis, Gerard J. & Chandrasekaran, Deepa, 2010. "Extent and impact of response biases in cross-national survey research," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 329-341.
    15. Leonard J. Paas & Meike Morren, 2018. "PLease do not answer if you are reading this: respondent attention in online panels," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 13-21, March.
    16. Ya-Hui Wang, 2014. "All You Can Eat: Behavioral Evidence From Taiwan," International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 7(2), pages 29-37.
    17. Mary Margaret Rogers & Robert A. Peterson & Gerald Albaum, 2013. "Measuring Business Related Ethicality Globally: Cultural Emic Or Etic?," International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14.
    18. Jerzy Wierzbinski & Anna Olga Kuzminska, 2016. "Comparability Problems of International Survey Data: The Example of Japan and Italy (Problem porownywalnosci danych sondazowych pochodzacych z roznych krajow: przyklad Japonii i W³och)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 14(60), pages 102-116.
    19. Douglas A. Hershey & Kène Henkens & Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2006. "Mapping the Minds of Retirement Planners," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 06-038/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    20. Quintal, Vanessa Ann & Lee, Julie Anne & Soutar, Geoffrey N., 2010. "Risk, uncertainty and the theory of planned behavior: A tourism example," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 797-805.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    work engagement measurement; UWES; work arrangements;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General

    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:sgm:pzwzuw:v:12:i:45:y:2014:p:113-136. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/somuwpl.html .

    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.