Psychological Distance Between Categories in the Likert Scale: Comparing Different Numbers of Options

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 72, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 533-546

  Wakita, Takafumi ^a   Ueshima, Natsumi ^b   Noguchi, Hiroyuki ^c  

^a KANSAI UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b Chita Child Rearing Main Support Center   (Japan)

^c NAGOYA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

item response theory; Likert scale; number of options

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863584049     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: 15523888     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164411431162     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bendig A. W.The reliability of self-ratings as a function of the amount of verbal anchoring and the number of categories on the scale.Journal of Applied Psychology. 1953;37:38-41.
2. Bendig A. W.Reliability and the number of rating scale categories.Journal of Applied Psychology. 1954;38:38-40.
3. Boote A. S.Reliability testing of psychographic scales: Five-point or seven-point? Anchored or labeled?.Journal of Advertising Research. 1981;21:53-60.
4. Brown G.,Wilding R. E.,Coulter R. L.Customer evaluation of retail salespeople using the SOCO scale: A replication extension and application.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 1991;9:347-351.
5. Chang L.A psychometric evaluation of four-point and six-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1994;18:205-215.
6. Cicchetti D. V.,Showalter D.,Tyrer P. J.The effect of number of rating scale categories on levels of inter-rater reliability: A Monte-Carlo investigation.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1985;9:31-36.
7. Garner W. R.Rating scales, discriminability and information transmission.Psychological Review. 1960;67:343-352.
8. Green P. E.,Rao V. R.Rating scales and information recovery: How many scales and response categories to use?.Journal of Marketing. 1970;34:33-39.
9. Komorita S. S.Attitude content, intensity, and the neutral point on a Likert scale.Journal of Social Psychology. 1963;61:327-334.
10. Lissitz R. W.,Green S. B.Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: A Monte-Carlo approach.Journal of Applied Psychology. 1975;60:10-13.
11. Matell M. S.,Jacoby J.Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert scale items? Study 1: Reliability and validity.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1971;31:657-674.
12. Muraki E.A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1992;16:159-176.
13. Muraki E.,Bock R. D.PARSCALE: Parameter Scaling of Rating Data. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software; 2003:.
14. Preston C. C.,Colman A. M.Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: Reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences.Acta Psychologia. 2000;104:1-15.
15. Oaster T. R. F.Number of alternatives per choice point and stability of Likert-type scales.Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1989;68:549-550.
16. Schuts H. G.,Rucker M. H.A comparison of variables configurations across scale lengths: An empirical study.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1975;35:319-324.
17. Wada S.Construction of the Big Five Scales of personality trait terms and concurrent validity with NPI.Japanese Journal of Psychology. 1996;67:61-17.
18. Wakita T.The distance between categories in rating-scale method: Applying item response model to the assessment process.Japanese Journal of Psychology. 2004;75:331-338.