One legacy of Mazanec: Binary questions are a simple, stable and valid measure of evaluative beliefs

International Journal of Culture, Tourism, and Hospitality Research

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 316-325

  Dolnicar, Sara ^a   Leisch, Friedrich ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Answer format; Attitude surveys; Binary; Concurrent validity; Measuring evaluative beliefs; Multi category; Research methods; Speed of completion; Stability; Survey design

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC RESEARCH; DECADAL VARIATION; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LEGAL SYSTEM; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; SURVEY DESIGN;

EID: 84867761671     PISSN: 17506182     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/17506181211265059     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Albaum, G., Rogers, R.D., Roster, C. and Yu, J.H. (2006), "Simple rating scale formats exploring extreme response" in International Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 49, No. 5, pp. 633-50.
2. Bendig, A.W. (1954), "Reliability and the number of rating scale categories" in The Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 38-40.
3. Boote, A.S. (1981), "Reliability testing of psychographic scales: five-point or seven-point? Anchored or labelled?" in Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 21, pp. 53-60.
4. Breiman, L. (2001), "Random forests" in Machine Learning, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 5-32.
5. Calantone, R., Schewe, C. and Allen, C.T. (1980), "Targeting specific advertising messages at tourist segments" in Hawkins, D.E., Shafer, E.L. and Rovelstad, J. (Eds.), Tourism Marketing and Management, George Washington University, Washington, DC, pp. 133-47.
6. Champney, H. and Marshall, H. (1939), "Optimal refinement of the rating scale" in Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 23, pp. 323-31.
7. Chang, L. (1994), "A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity" in Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 205-15.
8. Cicchetti, D.V., Showalter, D. and Tyrer, P. (1985), "The effect of number of rating scale categories upon levels of interrater reliability: a Monte Carlo investigation" in Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 9, pp. 31-46.
9. Cox, E.P. (1980), "The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: a review" in Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, pp. 407-22.
10. Crask, M. (1981), "Segmenting the vacationer market: identifying the vacation preferences, demographics, and magazine readership of each group" in Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 20, pp. 20-34.
11. De Jong, M.G., Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M., Fox, J.-P. and Baumgartner, H. (2008), "Using item response theory to measure extreme response style in marketing research: a global investigation" in Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 104-15.
12. Dolnicar, S. (2003), "Simplifying three-way questionnaires - do the advantages of binary answer categories compensate for the loss of information?", Australia and New Zealand Marketing Academy (ANZMAC) CD Proceedings, ANZMAC.
13. Dolnicar, S. (2004), "Beyond 'commonsense segmentation' - a systematics of segmentation approaches in tourism" in Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 244-50.
14. Dolnicar, S. and Grün, B. (2007a), "User-friendliness of answer formats - an empirical comparison" in Australasian Journal of Market and Social Research, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 19-28.
15. Dolnicar, S. and Grün, B. (2007b), "Question stability in brand image measurement - comparing alternative answer formats and accounting for heterogeneity in descriptive models" in Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 26-41.
16. Dolnicar, S. and Grün, B. (2007c), "How constrained a response: a comparison of binary, ordinal and metric answer formats" in Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 108-22.
17. Dolnicar, S., Grün, B. and Leisch, F. (2011), "Quick, simple and reliable: forced binary survey questions" in International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 231-52.
18. Finn, R.H. (1972), "Effects of some variations in rating scale characteristics on the means and reliabilities of rating" in Educational and Psychological Measurements, Vol. 32, pp. 255-65.
19. Garner, W.R. (1960), "Rating scales, discriminatability, and information transmission" in The Psychological Review, Vol. 67, No. 6, pp. 343-52.
20. Goodrich, J. (1980), "Benefit segmentation of US international travelers: an empirical study with American Express" in Hawkins, D.E., Shafer, E.L. and Rovelstad, J. (Eds.), Tourism Marketing and Management, George Washington University, Washington, DC, pp. 133-47.
21. Green, P.E. and Rao, V.R. (1970), "Rating scales and information recovery - how many scales and response categories to use?" in Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34, pp. 33-9.
22. Hancock, G.R. and Klockars, A.J. (1991), "The effect of scale manipulations on validity: targetting frequency rating scales for anticipated performance levels" in Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 147-54.
23. Jenkins, G.D.J. and Taber, T.D. (1977), "A Monte Carlo study of factors affecting three indices of composite scale reliability" in Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 392-8.
24. Jones, R.R. (1968), "Differences in response consistency and subjects' preferences for three personality inventory response formats" in Proceedings of the 76th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 247-8.
25. Komorita, S.S. (1963), "Attitude content, intensity, and the neutral point on a Likert scale" in Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 61, pp. 327-34.
26. Komorita, S.S. and Graham, W.K. (1965), "Number of scale points and the reliability of scales" in Educational and Psychological Measurements, Vol. 25, pp. 987-95.
27. Liaw, A. and Wiener, M. (2002), "Classification and regression by random forest" in R News, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 18-22.
28. Lissitz, R.W. and Green, S.B. (1975), "Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: a Monte Carlo approach" in Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 10-13.
29. Martin, W.S.M., Fruchter, B. and Mathis, W.J. (1974), "An investigation of the effect of the number of scale intervals on principal components factor analysis" in Educational and Psychological Measurements, Vol. 34, pp. 537-45.
30. Matell, M.S. and Jacoby, J. (1971a), "Communication and research notes" in Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 495-500.
31. Matell, M.S. and Jacoby, J. (1971b), "Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert scale items? Study 1: reliability and validity" in Educational and Psychological Measurements, Vol. 31, pp. 657-74.
32. Mazanec, J.A. (1984), "How to detect travel market segments: a clustering approach" in Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 17-21.
33. Mazanec, J.A. (2000), "Market segmentation" Jafari, J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Tourism, Routledge, London.
34. Miller, G.A. (1956), "The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information" in Psychological Review, Vol. 63, pp. 81-97.
35. Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
36. Oaster, T.R.F. (1989), "Number of alternatives per choice point and stability of Likert-type scales" in Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 68, pp. 549-50.
37. Peabody, D. (1962), "Two components in bipolar scales: direction and extremeness" in Psychological Review, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 65-73.
38. Preston, C.C. and Colman, A.M. (2000), "Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences" in Acta Psychologica, Vol. 104, pp. 1-15.
39. R Development Core Team (2010), R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
40. Remmers, H.H. and Ewart, E. (1941), "Reliability of multiple-choice measuring instruments as a function of the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula" in Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 61-6.
41. Rossi, P.E., Gilula, Z. and Allenby, G. (2001), "Overcoming scale usage heterogeneity" in Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 96, No. 453, pp. 20-31.
42. Rossiter, J.R. (2011), Measurement for the Social Sciences - The C-OAR-SE Method and Why it Must Replace Psychometrics, Springer, New York, NY.
43. Rossiter, J.R. and Bergkvist, L. (2009), "The importance of choosing one good item for single-item measures of attitude towards the ad and attitude towards the brand and its generalization to all measures" in Transfer: Werbeforschung & Praxis, Vol. 55, No. 2, pp. 8-18.
44. Schutz, H.G. and Rucker, M.H. (1975), "A comparison of variable configurations across scale lengths: an empirical study" in Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 35, pp. 319-24.
45. Symonds, P.M. (1924), "On the loss of reliability in rating due to coarseness of the scale" in Journal of Experimental Psychology, Vol. 7, pp. 456-61.