A New Scale in Education (Social Science)

Siniša Opić

doi:10.23947/2334-8496-2026-14-2-357-372

Authors

Siniša Opić University of Zagreb, Faculty of Teacher Education, Croatia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9800-0145

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2026-14-2-357-372

Keywords:

binary choice, intervals, measurements, new scale, social science

Abstract

This paper introduces a new scale in the social sciences that combines two types of measurements: a binary choice and a relative interval measurement consisting of 10+10 intervals. The scale’s relative interval nature allows for differentiation between intervals of 10±10, expressed based on the principle of deciles. This approach provides a more nuanced differentiation between degrees compared to traditional Likert scales. The paper also discusses a coding method and includes graphical representations of the data. An important aspect of the scale is its capacity to categorize responses into positive and negative attitudes (NEGATT and POSATT), enabling separate descriptive and inferential statistical analyses.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

👁 Abstract Views: 2📥 PDF Downloads: 0

References

Adams, E.W., Fagot, R.F., Robinson, R.E. (1965). A Theory of Appropriate Statistics. Psychometrika, 30(2), 99-127.

Allen, I.E., Seaman, C.A. (2007). Likert Scales and Data Analyses. Quality Progress, 40, 64-65.

Anjaria, K. (2022). Knowledge Derivation from Likert Scale Using Z-numbers. Information Sciences, 590, 234-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2022.01.024

Aybek, Eren C., Toraman, C. (2022). How Many Response Categories are Sufficient for Likert-type Scales? An Empirical Study Based on the Item Response Theory. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 9(2), 534-547. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1132931

Bishop, Phillip A., Herron, Robert L. (2015). Use and Misuse of the Likert Item Responses and Other Ordinal Measures. International Journal of Exercise Science, 8 (3), 297-302. PMID: 27182418; PMCID: PMC4833473. https://doi.org/10.70252/LANZ1453

Boote, A. S. (1981). Reliability Testing of Psychographic Scales: Five-Point or Seven-Point? Anchored or labeled? Journal of Advertising Research, 21(5), 53-60.

Brown, G., Widing, R. E., II, & Coulter, R. L. (1991). Customer Evaluation of Retail Salespeople Utilizing the SOCO Scale: A Replication, Extension, and Application. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19, 347-351.

Carifio, J., Perla, R.J. (2007). Ten Common Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, Persistent Myths, and Urban Legends about Likert Scales and Likert Response Formats and their Antidotes. Journal of Social Sciences 3(3), 106-116. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2007.106.116

Chang L. (1994). A Psychometric Evaluation of 4-Point and 6-Point Likert-Type Scale in Relation to Reliability and Validity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18(3), 205-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169401800302

Chyung, S. Y., Roberts, K., Swanson, I., & Hankinson, A. (2017). Evidence-Based Survey Design: The Use of a Midpoint on the Likert Scale. Performance Improvement, 56(10), 15-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21727

Cox, E.P. (1980). The Optimal Number of Response Alternate for a Scale: A review. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 407-422. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700401

De Vellis, R.F. (2003). Scale Development, Theory and Applications (2nd ed., Vol. 26). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Finstad, K. (2010). The Usability Metric for User Experience. Interactions, 17(1), 11–15.

Friborg, O., Martinussen, M., Rosenvinge, Jan H. (2006). Likert-based vs. semantic differential-based scorings of positive psychological constructs: A psychometric comparison of two versions of a scale measuring resilience. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(5), 873-884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.08.015

Garner, W.R. (1960). Rating scales, discriminability and information transmission. Psychological Review, 67(6), 343-352.

Glass, G. V., Peckham, P. D., & Sanders, J. R. (1972). Consequences of Failure to Meet Assumptions Underlying the Fixed Effects Analyses of Variance and Covariance. Review of Educational Research, 42(3), 237-288. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543042003237

Green, P.E., Rao, V.R. (1970). Rating Scales and Information Recovery: How Many Scales and Response Categories to Use? Journal of Marketing, 34(3), 33-39.

Guerra, Andrea L., Gidel, T., Vezzetti, E. (2016). Toward a common procedure using Likert and Likert-type scales in small groups comparative design observations. DS 84: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2016 14th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia.

Harris, R.J. (1975). A Primer of Multivariate Statistics. New York: Academic Press.

Hernández, A., Muñiz, J., & García-Cueto, E. (2000). Comportamiento del modelo de respuesta graduada en función del número de categorías de la escala [Graded model trend based on the number of the response categories of the scale]. Psicothema, 12(2), 288-291.

Jakobsson, U. (2004). Statistical presentation and analysis of ordinal data in nursing research. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 18(4), 341-445.

Jamieson, S. (2000). Likert Scales: How to (ab)use Them. Medical Education, 38(12), 1212-1218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02012.x

Kline, Rex B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 55.

Leung, Shing-On (2011). A Comparison of Psychometric Properties and Normality in 4-, 5-, 6-, and 11-Point Likert Scales. Journal of Social Service Research, 37(4), 412-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2011.580697

Lewis, J.P., Traill, A. (1999). Statistics Explained. Harlow, England: Addison-Wesley pp. 377.

Lozano, Luis M., García-Cueto, E., Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the Number of Response Categories on the Reliability and Validity of Rating Scales. Methodology European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 4(2),73-79. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.4.2.73

McCallum, D. M., Keith, B. R., & Wiebe, D. J. (1988). Comparison of response formats for Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scales: Six levels versus two levels. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(4), 732-736. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5204_12

Miller, G. A. (1994). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 101(2), 343-352. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.343

Moreno, R., Martínez, R.J., & Muñiz, J. (2004). Directrices para la construcción de ítems de elección múltiple [A guide to the multiple choice items development]. Psicothema, 16, 490-497.

Muñiz, J., García-Cueto, E., & Lozano, L. M. (2005). Item Format and the Psychometric Properties of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.03.021

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd edition). McGraw-Hill.

Osgood, C. E. (1952). The Nature and Measurement of Meaning. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 226-233.

Pearson, B., Lacombe, D., Khatun, N. (2024). Likert Scale Variables in Personal Finance Research: The Neutral Category Problem. Econometrics 12(4),33. https://doi.org/10.3390/econometrics12040033

Pett, M.A. (1997). Nonparametric Statistics for Health Care Research. London: SAGE Publications.

Preston, Carolyn C., Colman, Andrew M. (2000). Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences. Acta Psychologica 104(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00050-5

Schrum, M.L., Johnson, M., Ghuy, M., Gombolay, Matthew C. (2020). Four Years in Review: Statistical Practices of Likert Scales in Human-Robot Interaction Studies. HRI ‘20: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction Cambridge United Kingdom, 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371382.3380739

Selimović, H., Opić, S., Selimović, N. (2023). Metodologija istraživanja u odgojno - obrazovnim znanostima. Travnik - Univerzitet u Travniku, Edukacijski fakultet.

Tanujaya, B., Prahmana, Rully Charitas I., Mumu, J. (2022). Likert Scale in Social Sciences Research: Problems and Difficulties. FWU Journal of Social Sciences 16(4), 89-101. https://sbbwu.edu.pk/journal/Winter2022,Vol.16,No.4/7.%20Likert%20Scale%20in%20Social%20Sciences%20Research.pdf

Uebersax J.S. (2006). Likert scales: Dispelling the Confusion. Statistical Methods for Rater Agreement website. Available at: http://john-uebersax.com/stat/likert.htm. Accessed: 12/12/2024.

Verhagen, T., van den Hooff, B., Meents, S. (2015). Toward a Better use of the Semantic Differential in IS Research: An Integrative Framework of Suggested Action. Journal of the Association of Information Systems 16 (2), 108-143.

Yaska, M., & Nuhu, B. M. (2024). Assessment of Measures of Central Tendency and Dispersion Using Likert-Type Scale. African Journal of Advances in Science and Technology Research, 16(2), 108-143. https://doi.org/10.62154/ajastr.2024.016.010379