Computer-based rating method for evaluating multiple visual stimuli on multiple scales

Computers in Human Behavior

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1929-1946

  Chuang, Yaliang ^a   Chen, Lin Lin ^a   Chuang, Ming Chuen ^b  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL CHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Comparative rating; Joint evaluation; Real time adjustment; Separate evaluation

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER NETWORKS; COMPUTERS; CONSUMER PRODUCTS; DRAG; DROPS; FLUID MECHANICS; MEASUREMENTS; PAPER; SCALES (WEIGHING INSTRUMENTS); WEIGHT CONTROL;

ADJUSTING MECHANISM; COMPUTER-BASED METHODS; DATA QUALITY (DQ); DRAG-AND-DROP; ELSEVIER (CO); EVALUATION METHODS; EVALUATION RATING; INTERACTIVE METHODS; MEASUREMENT TOOLS; MISSING VALUES (GAPS); MULTIPLE SCALES; SUBJECTIVE EVALUATIONS; TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY; VISUAL STIMULUS;

MECHANISMS;

EID: 45749097375     PISSN: 07475632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2007.08.003     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Barak A. Psychological applications on the Internet: A discipline on the threshold of a new millennium. Applied and Preventive Psychology 8 4 (1999) 231-245
2. Bárcenas P., Elortondo F.J.P., and Albisu M. Comparison of free choice profiling, direct similarity measurements and hedonic data for ewes' milk cheeses sensory evaluation. International Dairy Journal 13 1 (2003) 67-77
3. Bijmolt T.H.A., and Wedel M. The effect of alternative methods of collecting similarity data for multidimensional scaling. International Journal for Research in Marketing 12 4 (1995) 363-371
4. Böckenholt U. Comparative judgments as an alternative to ratings: Identifying the scale origin. Psychological Methods 9 4 (2004) 453-465
5. Chuang M.C., Chang C.C., and Hsu S.H. Perceptual factors underlying user preferences toward product form of mobile phones. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 27 4 (2001) 247-258
6. Desmet P.M.A., and Hekkert P. Framework of product experience. International Journal of Design 1 1 (2007) 57-66
7. Downs P.E. Testing the upgraded semantic differential. Journal of the Market Research Society 20 2 (1978) 99-103
8. Epstein J., and Klinkenberg W.D. From Eliza to Internet: A brief history of computerized assessment. Computers in Human Behavior 17 3 (2001) 295-314
9. Falahee M., and MacRae A.W. Perceptual variation among drinking waters: The reliability of sorting and ranking data for multidimensional scaling. Food Quality and Preference 8 5-6 (1997) 389-394
10. Golden L.L., Albaum G., and Zimmer M.R. The numerical comparative scale: An economical format for retail image measurement. Journal of Retailing 63 4 (1987) 393-410
11. Heise, D. R. (2001). Project Magellan: Collecting cross-cultural affective meanings via the Internet. Electronic Journal of Sociology, 5(3). Retrieved 31.07.05.
12. Hsee C.K. The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 67 3 (1996) 247-257
13. Hsiao K.A., and Chen L.L. Fundamental dimensions of affective responses to product shapes. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 36 6 (2006) 553-564
14. Huang H.M. Do print and Web surveys provide the same results?. Computers in Human Behavior 22 3 (2006) 334-350
15. Hughes G.D. Some confounding effects of forced choice scales. Journal of Marketing Research 6 2 (1969) 223-226
16. Hughes G.D. Upgrading the semantic differential. Journal of the Market Research Society 17 1 (1975) 41-44
17. Knapp H., and Kirk S.A. Using pencil and paper, Internet and touch-tone phones for self-administered surveys: Does methodology matter?. Computers in Human Behavior 19 1 (2003) 117-134
18. Landon E.L. Order bias, the ideal rating, and the semantic differential. Journal of Marketing Research 8 3 (1971) 375-378
19. Lukin M.E., Dowd E.T., Plake B.S., and Kraft R.G. Comparing computerized versus traditional psychological assessment. Computers in Human Behavior 1 1 (1985) 49-58
20. McBurney D.H., and White T.L. True experiments, part 1: Single-factor designs. Research methods. 6th ed. (2004), Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA 265-285
21. Nagamachi M. Kansei engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for product development. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 15 1 (1995) 3-11
22. Narayana C.L. Graphic positioning scale: An economical instrument for surveys. Journal of Marketing Research 14 1 (1977) 118-122
23. Nielsen, J. (2004). Card sorting: How many users to test. Retrieved 31.07.05.
24. Norman D.A. Emotional design (2004), Basic Books, New York
25. Osgood C.E., Suci G.J., and Tannenbaum P.H. The measurement of meaning (1957), University of Illinois Press, Urbana
26. Peterson R.A. Rating scales. Constructing effective questionnaires (2000), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 61-81
27. Petiot J.F., and Yannou B. Measuring consumer perceptions for a better comprehension, specification and assessment of product semantics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 33 6 (2004) 507-525
28. Ramsay J.O. How to use MULTISCALE. In: Shiffman S.S., Reynolds M.L., and Young F.W. (Eds). Introduction to multidimensional scaling: Theory, methods, and applications (1981), Academic Press, London 211-235
29. Ramsay, J. O. (1997). MULTISCALE manual (extended version). . Retrieved 31.01.06.
30. Sherif M., and Hovland C.I. Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change (1961), Yale University Press, New Haven
31. Smith, S. M. (1999). A short guide to MDPREF: Multidimensional analysis of preference data. . Retrieved 31.01.06.
32. Smith S.M., and Albaum G.S. Measurement and scaling in marketing research. Fundamentals of marketing research (2005), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 371-412
33. Tullis, T., & Wood, L. (2004). How many users are enough for a card-sorting study? In Paper presented at the usability professionals association conference, Minneapolis, MN.
34. Wells W.D., and Smith G. Four semantic rating scales compared. Journal of Applied Psychology 44 6 (1960) 393-397
35. Wilson F.R., Genco K.T., and Yager G.G. Assessing the equivalence of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized tests: Demonstration of a promising methodology. Computers in Human Behavior 1 3-4 (1985) 265-275
36. Van der Kloot W.A., and Van Herk H. Multidimensional scaling of sorting data: A comparison of three procedures. Multivariate Behavioral Research 26 4 (1991) 563-581