IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v53y2019i1d10.1007_s11135-018-0762-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Semantic differential for the twenty-first century: scale relevance and uncertainty entering the semantic space

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Stoklasa

    (Lappeenranta University of Technology
    Palacký University Olomouc)

  • Tomáš Talášek

    (Palacký University Olomouc)

  • Jana Stoklasová

    (Marital and family counseling centre Prostějov)

Abstract

We propose an interval-valued version of the semantic differentiation method originally proposed by Osgood et al. (The measurement of meaning, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1957). The semantic differential is a tool for the extraction of attitudes of respondents towards given objects or of the connotative meaning of concepts. Semantic-differential-type scales are also frequently used in social-science research. The proposed generalisation of the original method is better suited for the reflection of perceived scale relevance and provides a possible solution to specific aspects of the concept–scale interaction issue and some other issues recently identified in the literature in connection with the use of semantic differential or semantic-differential-type scales. Lower appropriateness of scales as perceived by the respondents is translated into uncertainty regions and neutral answers can be distinguished from answers where the scale is perceived to be irrelevant. We suggest a modified data collection procedure and describe the calculation of the representation of the attitude towards an object as a point in the semantic space surrounded by an “uncertainty box”. The new method introduces uncertainty to the semantic space and allows for a more appropriate reflection of the meaning of concepts, words, etc. in formal models. No restrictions are introduced in terms of the availability of results—standard semantic-differential outputs including the position of objects in the semantic space and their semantic distance are available. The new method, however, reflects the uncertainty stemming from linguistic labels of the scale endpoints and from lower perceived appropriateness of the scales in the process.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Stoklasa & Tomáš Talášek & Jana Stoklasová, 2019. "Semantic differential for the twenty-first century: scale relevance and uncertainty entering the semantic space," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 435-448, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:53:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-018-0762-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-018-0762-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-018-0762-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-018-0762-1?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ross, Ivan, 1971. "Self-Concept and Brand Preference," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 38-50, January.
    2. John G Fennell & Roland J Baddeley, 2013. "Reward Is Assessed in Three Dimensions That Correspond to the Semantic Differential," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-15, February.
    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. Ostovan, Nima & Khalili Nasr, Arash, 2022. "The manifestation of luxury value dimensions in brand engagement in self-concept," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    2. Sirgy, M. Joseph & Grewal, Dhruv & Mangleburg, Tamara, 2000. "Retail Environment, Self-Congruity, and Retail Patronage: An Integrative Model and a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 127-138, August.
    3. Lee, Jihyun & Lee, Yuri, 2015. "The interactions of CSR, self-congruity and purchase intention among Chinese consumers," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 19-26.
    4. Fethi Klabi, 2020. "To what extent do conspicuous consumption and status consumption reinforce the effect of self-image congruence on emotional brand attachment? Evidence from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(2), pages 99-117, June.
    5. Shah, Denish & Webster, Emily & Kour, Gurpreet, 2023. "Consuming for content? Understanding social media-centric consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 155(PB).
    6. Shamah, Rania A.M. & Mason, Michela C. & Moretti, Andrea & Raggiotto, Francesco, 2018. "Investigating the antecedents of African fast food customers' loyalty: A self-congruity perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 446-456.
    7. Funk, Daniel C. & James, Jeffrey D., 2004. "The Fan Attitude Network (FAN) Model: Exploring Attitude Formation and Change among Sport Consumers," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, May.
    8. Hollenbeck, Candice R. & Kaikati, Andrew M., 2012. "Consumers' use of brands to reflect their actual and ideal selves on Facebook," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 395-405.
    9. Parment, Anders, 2008. "Distribution strategies for volume and premium brands in highly competitive consumer markets," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 250-265.
    10. Reo Song & Sangkil Moon & Haipeng (Allan) Chen & Mark B. Houston, 2018. "When marketing strategy meets culture: the role of culture in product evaluations," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 384-402, May.
    11. Chiara Bartoli, 2022. "Consumer self-concept and digitalization: what does this mean for brands?," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2022(4), pages 419-437, December.
    12. Hung, Kam & Petrick, James F., 2012. "Testing the effects of congruity, travel constraints, and self-efficacy on travel intentions: An alternative decision-making model," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 855-867.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:53:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-018-0762-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.