It would treat "don't agree" as the zero point. So an answer at the 100%
point would be interpreted as twice as strong as an answer at the 50% point.
The comparison with zero comes in the analysis - the mean/median would give
you "true" averages. Obviously, you couldn't say that the strongly agree
point is five times as agreement as the zero point - just as you can't say
that 5 millimeters is 5 times (or 50 times, 500 times, etc) as 0
millimeters.
With regard to what the person thinks when they answer the question - that
is beyond the scope of the example question. That requires testing from a
qualitative perspective.
With the analysis work I have done recently with "similar to Likert scales",
we are comparing the proportions of each group that responded to each option
on the scale rather than comparing means or variances on the overall group
"scores" to each item.
cheers
Michelle
"dennis roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> At 11:06 AM 9/8/01 +1200, Magenta wrote:
>
> >Sure do, I think that if you redid it so that the scale was now:
> >
> >don't agree
> >strongly agree
> > |_______________________________________|
> >
> >that would give you a ratio scale between no agreement and strong
agreement.
> >You would then be able to use, e.g. ANOVA, on your test results, which
would
> >be numeric in millimeters.
>
> TO TALK about these things as ratio scales is downright silly
>
> look at the item:
>
> stat will help me in my professional work
>
> don't agree |(0)__________________________________(5)__| agree
>
> you aren't going to claim that the "agree" means 5 times a stronger view
> than "don't agree" ... are you???
>
> does don't agree mean you are thinking that it will HURT your professional
> work? i don't think so ... it could mean you have a view that it will not
> help ... but, it won't put you in some disadvantaged position ... but it
> COULD mean that you don't agree because you think it will harm you
>
> thus, responding "don't agree" is like the ? or neutral position ... which
> is essentially impossible to evaluate
>
>
> >cheers
> >Michelle <blush>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >=================================================================
> >Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
> >the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
> > http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
> >=================================================================
>
> ==============================================================
> dennis roberts, penn state university
> educational psychology, 8148632401
> http://roberts.ed.psu.edu/users/droberts/drober~1.htm
>
>
>
> =================================================================
> Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
> the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
> http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
> =================================================================
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
