UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Perpustakaan Tuanku Bainun |
| Surveys are fundamental research tools extensively used by researchers and academic experts across various fields. Their significance lies in their ability to give respondents autonomy in evaluating presented items. An essential part of crafting an effective survey involves carefully selecting scaling methods during the instrument construction phase. This study conducts a narrative literature review to analyse existing findings on the use of Likert scales, mapping out how these scales are applied to understand the interplay between scale divisions in social sciences research. Likert scales are popular in diverse fields, including social sciences, psychology, politics, and economics. However, existing methodologies for instrument construction often lack a comprehensive depiction of the most suitable scales for specific studies. This paper aims to address this gap by providing guidance and enhancing understanding for researchers in selecting appropriate and relevant scales, particularly within the context of their research topics. Findings suggest that a more systematic approach to scale selection can improve research efficacy. Recommendations include developing standardized guidelines to aid researchers in choosing optimal scales for their studies, ensuring both methodological rigor and relevance to the research questions.
Keywords: Likert Scale, Social Science, Questionnaire, Survey Design, Response Rate, Rating Scale, Response Scale |
| References |
Ahn, E., & Kang, H. (2018). Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis. Korean Journal of Anaesthesiology, 71(2), 103-112. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.2.103 Allanson, Patricia E., and Notar, Charles E. (2020). Statistics as Measurement: 4 Scales/Levels of Measurement. In: Education Quarterly Reviews, 3(3), 375-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1993.03.03.146 Alhassn, I., Asiamah, N., Opuni, F. F., & Alhassan, A. (2022). The Likert scale: exploring the unknowns and their potential to mislead the world. UDS International Journal of Development, 9(2), 867-880. Doi: https://doi.org/10.47740/586.UDSIJD6i Anjaria, K. (2022). Knowledge derivation from Likert scale using Z-numbers. Information Sciences, 590, 234-252. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2022.01.024 Awang, Z., Afthanorhan, A., & Mamat, M. (2016). The Likert scale analysis using parametric based Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Computational Methods in Social Sciences, 4(1), 13-21. Baghaei, P., & Effatpanah, F. (2024). Nonparametric Kernel Smoothing Item Response Theory Analysis of Likert Items. Psych, 6(1), 236-259. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/psych6010015 Baker, F. B. (2001). The Basics of Item Response Theory. ERIC. Bhattacharjee, S., Rajaraman, P., Jacobs, K. B., Wheeler, W. A., Melin, B. S., Hartge, P., ... & Chatterjee, N. (2012). A subset-based approach improves power and interpretation for the combined analysis of genetic association studies of heterogeneous traits. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 90(5), 821-835. Bellizzi, M. G., Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2020). Air Transport Service Quality Factors: A Systematic Literature Review. Transportation Research Procedia, 45, 218-225. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2020.03.010 Bodur, S., Topal, S., Gürkan, H., & Edalatpanah, S. A. (2024). A Novel Neutrosophic Likert Scale Analysis of Perceptions of Organizational Distributive Justice via a Score Function: A Complete Statistical Study and Symmetry Evidence Using Real-Life Survey Data. Symmetry, 16(5), 598. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16050598 Chaibakhsh, S., & Pourhoseingholi, A. (2023). A Modification on Intra Class Correlation Estimation for Ordinal Scale Variable Using Latent Variable Model. Journal of Biostatistics and Epidemiology. Doi: https://doi.org/10.18502/jbe.v9i1.13972 Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (2019). Constructing Validity: New Developments in Creating Objective Measuring Instruments. Psychol. Assess. 31, 1412. Doi: https://doi.10.1037/pas0000626 Demiris, G., Parker Oliver, D., & Washington, K. (2019). Narrative review: A guide for researchers. Publisher. Dombi, J., Jónás, T., Dombi, J., & Jónás, T. (2021). Likert Scale-Based Evaluations with Flexible Fuzzy Numbers. Advances in the Theory of Probabilistic and Fuzzy Data Scientific Methods with Applications, 167-187. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51949-0_5 Feuerstahler, L. (2023). Scale type revisited: Some misconceptions, misinterpretations, and recommendations. Psych, 5(2), 234-248. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5020018 Finstad, K. (2010). Response Interpolation and Scale Sensitivity: Evidence against 5-point scales. Journal of Usability Studies, 5(3), 104-110. Galvan, J. L. (2017). Writing Literature Review a Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioural Science. Oxon: Routledge. García-Fernández, J., Postigo, Á., Cuesta, M., González-Nuevo, C., Menéndez-Aller, Á., & García-Cueto, E. (2022). To be direct or not: Reversing Likert response format items. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 25, e24. Doi: https://10.1017/SJP.2022.20 Goggin, S., & Stoker, L. (2014). Optimal scale length and single-item attitude measures: evidence from simulations and a two-wave experiment. In APSA 2014 Annual Meeting Paper. Güler, G., & Ayan, C. (2020). Review of Attitude Scales Developed in Turkey Between 2002-2018 Regarding the Scale Development Process. Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 53(3). Doi: DOI: https://10.30964/auebfd.658488 Gupta, Y., Khan, F. M., & Agarwal, S. (2021). Exploring Factors Influencing Mobile Learning in Higher Education-A Systematic Review. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 15(12). Doi: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i12.22503 Hartley, J. (2013). Some Thoughts on Likert-type scales. Int J Clin Health Psychology, 13, 83-86. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70040-7 James, R. L. (2019). Measuring user experience with 3, 5, 7, or 11 points: Does it matter? Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 63(6), 999–1011. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819881312 Jebb, A. T., Ng, V., & Tay, L. (2021). A review of key Likert scale development advances: 1995–2019. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 637547. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.637547 Johns, R. (2010). Likert Items and Scales. SQB. Kusmaryono, I., Wijayanti, D., & Maharani, H. R. (2022). Number of Response Options, Reliability, Validity, and Potential Bias in the Use of the Likert Scale Education and Social Science Research: A Literature Review. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 8(4), 625-637. Doi: https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.8.4.625 Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for The Measurement of Attitudes. (R. Woodworth, Ed.) Archives of Psychology, 140, 5-55. Marco, A., Núñez, R., Ramírez, K., Alejandra, G.-R., Irma, G., & Esparza, G. (2024). Measurement invariance in five-point and seven-point Likert scale of the SWLS in five Ibero-American countries. Psicumex, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.36793/psicumex.v14i1.605 McRae, A. W. (1970). Channel Capacity in Absolute Judgment Tasks: An Artifact of Information Bias? Psychological Bulletin, 73, 112-121. Doi: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0028513 Memmedova, K., & Ertuna, B. (2024). Development of a fuzzy Likert scales to measure variables in social sciences. Information Sciences, 654, 119792. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2023.119792 Menold, N., & Bogner, K. (2016). Design of Rating Scales in Questionnaires. GESIS survey guidelines, 4. Doi: https://10.15465/gesis-sg_en_015 Mirahmadizadeh, A., Delam, H., Seif, M., & Bahrami, R. (2018). Designing, constructing, and analyzing Likert scale data. Journal of Education and Community Health, 5(3), 63-72. Doi: https://doi.org/10.21859/jech.5.3.63 Necho, M., Tsehay, M., Birkie, M., Biset, G., & Tadesse, E. (2021). Prevalence of Anxiety, Depression, And Psychological Distress Among the General Population During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 67(7), 892-906. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640211003121 Pescaroli, G., Velazquez, O., Alcántara-Ayala, I., Galasso, C., Kostkova, P., & Alexander, D. (2020). A Likert scale-based model for benchmarking operational capacity, organizational resilience, and disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 11, 404-409. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-020-00276-9 Preston, C. C., & Colman, A. M. (2000). Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, And Respondent Preferences. Acta Psychological, 104(1), 1-15. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00050-5 Raymond, Doe., Bryan, A., Landrum., Kaelyn, M., Lewis., Matthew, E., Glenn., Jacob, D., Smith. (2022). Likert Items: Should(n’t) We Really Care? International journal of social science studies, 11(1):32-32. https://doi.org/10.11114/ijsss.v11i1.5747 Robitzsch, A. (2022). On the bias in structural equation modeling when treating discrete variables as ordinal instead of continuous. PsyArXiv, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms11040162 Rokeman, N. R. M., & Kob, C. G. C. (2023). Tahap Kepuasan Kerja Pensyarah Vokasional Terhadap Pencapaian Prestasi di Kolej Vokasional Malaysia: Satu Kajian Rintis. Jurnal ILMI, 13(1), 124-139. Rokeman, N. R. M., & Kob, C. G. C. (2024). Evaluation of the Content Validity Index of a Job Satisfaction Instrument on Performance among Tourism Lecturers in a Malaysian Vocational College. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(2), 1669–1683. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i2/20965 Russo, G. M., Tomei, P. A., Serra, B., & Mello, S. (2021). Differences in the use of 5-or 7-point likert scale: an application in food safety culture. Organizational Cultures, 21(2), 1. Doi: https://10.18848/2327-8013/CGP/v21i02/1-17 Sangthong, M. (2020). The Effect of The Likert Point Scale and Sample Size on The Efficiency of Parametric and Nonparametric Tests. Thailand Statistician, 18(1), 55-64. Simms, L. J., Zelazny, K., Williams, T. F., & Bernstein, L. (2019). Does the Number of Response Options Matter? Psychometric Perspectives Using Personality Questionnaire Data. Psychological Assessment, 1-9. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000648 Sijtsma, K., & van der Ark, L. A. (2020). Measurement models for psychological attributes. CRC Press. Sirganci, G., & Uyumaz, G. (2022). Determining the factors affecting the psychological distance between categories in the rating scale. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 8(3), 178-190. Doi: https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.858599 Schrum, M. L., Johnson, M., Ghuy, M., & Gombolay, M. C. (2020). Four years in review: Statistical practices of Likert scales in human-robot interaction studies. In Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 43-52). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3371382.3380739 Sukhera, J. (2022). Narrative reviews in medical education: key steps for researchers. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 14(4), 418-419. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-22-00481.1 Taherdoost, H. (2017). Determining Sample Size; How to Calculate Survey Sample Size. International Journal of Economics and Management Systems, 2. Vine, R. (2006). Google Scholar. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 94(1), 97–99. Wakita, T., Ueshima, N., & Noguchi, H. (2012). Psychological distance between categories in the Likert scale: Comparing different numbers of options. Educational and psychological measurement, 72(4), 533-546. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164411431162 Winston, B. E. (2021). A critique of Likert-response items in social science research: A research note. In Handbook of Research on Advancements in Organizational Data Collection and Measurements: Strategies for Addressing Attitudes, Beliefs, and Behaviour, 43-50. IGI Global. Doi: https://10.4018/978-1-7998-7665-6.ch003 Yoon, G. (2024). No One Optimal Way to Measure People’s Attitudes? Preferred Length of Scales in Advertising Research. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 45(1), 43-70. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2023.2246049
|
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |