On 6 Mar 2002 06:17:09 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mobile Survey)
wrote:

> Dear all,
> I am using the following 7-point semantic differential scale scale
> (with mid-point anchor too) in my survey.
> 1. extremely dissatisfied
> 4. neither dissatisfied /nor satisfied
> 7. extremely satisfied
> I understand that this can be treated as a metric interval scale. The
> problem however, is that the scatter plots of this scale with another
> 7-point scale on another variable that I am using obviously does not
> look like the continuous data that we need to have a good linear
> relationship where the Pearson correlation coefficient makes sense. I
> had the following question

I think -- it is 'semantic differential'  when you have several
topics, each of which is subjected to ratings on 10 or 20 
bipolar pairs (10 or 20 'items').  Try one I just found,

http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/308/308lect05.htm

If one item has a terrible distribution, it is going to 
correlate poorly.  Okay, that means, Drop it.
For the statistics, you drop both:  bad content and 
bad wording.  (Wording is usually easier to mend.)

If it has a terrible distribution, it does not qualify as a
wholly suitable Likert item, either.

> 1.In this case should I use the Spearman rho coefficient? 
> 2.If the above scales are for indicators of a latent variable , then
> should I report the inter-item and item to total correlations and
> their significance in terms of Spearman correlations?

No. No.

-- 
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
.                                                               .
.                                                               .
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at:
.                  http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/                    .
=================================================================
.                                                               .

Reply via email to