Přehled o publikaci
2024
Do visual analogue scales perform better than Likert-type scales?
ŠRAGOVÁ, Eva, Hynek CÍGLER, David ELEK, Petra HUBATKA, Gabriela KALISTOVÁ et. al.Základní údaje
Originální název
Do visual analogue scales perform better than Likert-type scales?
Autoři
ŠRAGOVÁ, Eva, Hynek CÍGLER, David ELEK, Petra HUBATKA a Gabriela KALISTOVÁ
Vydání
IMPS 2024 : The 89th Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, 2024
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Prezentace na konferencích
Stát vydavatele
Česká republika
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Odkazy
Organizace
Fakulta sociálních studií – Masarykova univerzita – Repozitář
Klíčová slova anglicky
Visual Analogue Scale; Likert Scale; reliability; internal consistency; dependability; stability; test-retest reliability; criterion validity; response time; response scale format
Návaznosti
GA23-06924S, projekt VaV.
Změněno: 25. 3. 2025 00:50, RNDr. Daniel Jakubík
Anotace
V originále
The Likert Scale (LS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) are widely used response formats in social sciences research. Some scholars propose that VAS, which can be seen as a Likert scale with an infinite number of response options, should outperform LS by allowing for more nuanced responses, increasing systematic variance, and better approximating the continuous nature of data. However, existing research comparing the psychometric properties of LS and VAS yields only inconclusive results regarding descriptive statistics, internal consistency, and respondent preferences. Furthermore, evidence on other psychometric properties remains scarce. This study addresses these gaps by examining the differences between LS and VAS in terms of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and response times utilizing an online within-subject experimental design. With a sample of 980 participants, we compared the five-point Likert Scale and the Visual Analogue Scale using two questionnaires: the Height Inventory (HI) and the Autonomy Subscale (AUT). We assessed both short-term dependability (test-retest reliability within a single session) and long-term stability (test-retest reliability over one week). Our findings indicate negligible or no differences in dependability, stability, or internal consistency between the LS and VAS. Criterion validity, as measured by the correlation of HI with self-reported height, was also equivalent for both scales. The only notable difference was in response time, with VAS taking approximately 16% longer to complete. We argue that VAS offers no significant advantages over LS, and due to the greater time demands of VAS, we conclude that using the LS is more worthwhile.