Abstract

Previous research by Zhang and Savalei (2015) proposed an alternative scale format to the Likert scale format: the Expanded format. Scale items in the Expanded format present both positively worded and negatively worded sentences as response options for each scale item; therefore, they were less affected by the acquiescence bias and method effects that often occur in the Likert scale items. The major goal of the current study is to further demonstrate the superiority of the Expanded format to the Likert format across different psychological scales. Specifically, we aim to replicate the findings of Zhang and Savalei and to determine whether order effect exists in the Expanded format scales. Six psychological scales were examined in the study, including the five subscales of the big five inventory (BFI) and the Rosenberg self-esteem (RSE) scale. Four versions were created for each psychological scale. One version was the original scale in the Likert format. The other three versions were in different Expanded formats that varied in the order of the response options. For each scale, the participant was randomly assigned to complete one scale version. Across the different versions of each scale, we compared the factor structures and the distributions of the response options. Our results successfully replicated the findings of Zhang and Savalei, and also showed that order effect was generally absent in the Expanded format scales. Based on these promising findings, we encourage researchers to use the Expanded format for these and other scales in their substantive research.

Highlights

  • Psychological scales are often written in the Likert format, in which respondents are asked how strongly they agree or disagree with the items

  • The current study had two goals:(1) to replicate Zhang and Savalei (2015) results on the superiority of the Expanded format relative to the Likert format on different psychological scales; and (2) to examine whether order effect exists in the Expanded format scales

  • We hypothesized that relative to scales in the Likert format, scales in the Expanded format would not be as susceptible to acquiescence bias and method effects, and have a more parsimonious factor structure

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Psychological scales are often written in the Likert format, in which respondents are asked how strongly they agree or disagree with the items. This scale format is known to have several problems (e.g., Ray, 1983; Saris et al, 2010; Sonderen et al, 2013; Wetzel and Greiff, 2018). The respondents may find the response options regarding the degree of agreement ambiguous (Saris et al, 2010). A respondent who picks “agree strongly” may mean (1) they are very careless at times, (2) they are somewhat careless most of the time, or (3) they are definitely Consider a Likert item from the big five inventory (BFI): “I am someone who can be somewhat careless at times.” The response options are “disagree a little,” disagree a little,” “agree a little” and “agree strongly.” A respondent who picks “agree strongly” may mean (1) they are very careless at times, (2) they are somewhat careless most of the time, or (3) they are definitely

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call