I would consider it a unipolar extent scale Maybe the visual anchor should be
0 to 6 to aid association with the number line concept
Dennis Roberts wrote:
At 01:39 PM 2/27/02 -0600, Jay Warner wrote:
Not stressful 1__ 2__ 3__ 4__ 5__ 6__ 7__ Very stressful
just out of curiosity how
for
not at all
To me the low end is zero rather than anti-stressful
In some fields the above might be used as an item in a scale As in your
example, the 16pf uses a series of items to produce bipolar scales
Some concepts make no sense as bipolar scales Ability, achievement, etc
have no cognitive
On 27 Feb 2002 15:01:24 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dennis Roberts) wrote:
At 01:39 PM 2/27/02 -0600, Jay Warner wrote:
Not stressful 1__ 2__ 3__ 4__ 5__ 6__ 7__ Very stressful
just out of curiosity ... how many consider the above to be an example of a
bipolar scale?
i don't
now, if we
At 09:51 AM 2/28/02 -0800, Jay Tanzman wrote:
I partially did this, insofar as I ran Pearson and Spearman correlations
between
several of the scales and, not surprisingly, the two correlation coefficients
and their p-values were similar. that issue is entirely a separate
one since the rank
At 01:39 PM 2/27/02 -0600, Jay Warner wrote:
Not stressful 1__ 2__ 3__ 4__ 5__ 6__ 7__ Very stressful
just out of curiosity ... how many consider the above to be an example of a
bipolar scale?
i don't
now, if we had an item like:
sad happy
1 . 7
THEN the mid point
J. Williams wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 15:17:55 -0800, Jay Tanzman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I just got chewed out by my boss for modelling the means of some 7-point
semantic differential scales. The scales were part of a written,
self-administered questionnaire, and were laid out like
2. Perhaps more likely, your boss may have learned
(wrongly?) that parametric stats should not be done unless scales
of measurement are at least interval in quality.
I don't know if his objection was to parametric statistics per se, but he did
object to calculating means on these data
Jay Tanzman wrote:
Jay Warner wrote:
Jay Tanzman wrote:
I just got chewed out by my boss for modelling the means of some 7-point
semantic differential scales. The scales were part of a written,
self-administered questionnaire, and were laid out like this:
Not stressful
Jay Tanzman wrote:
I just got chewed out by my boss for modelling the means of some 7-point
semantic differential scales. The scales were part of a written,
self-administered questionnaire, and were laid out like this:
Not stressful 1__ 2__ 3__ 4__ 5__ 6__ 7__ Very stressful
So, why
Will,
I gotta reply to this one! I've done this type of thing a number of times.
Will Hopkins wrote:
I have an important (for me) question, but first a preamble and
hopefully some useful info for people using Likert scales.
A week or so ago I initiated a discussion about how non-normal
An example might shed some light on one point involved here. Recently
Plymouth State College considered the possibility of arming -- well,
part of the question was WHOM. Many of us refered to them as Campus
Security while they insisted they were Campus Police. Looking at old
phone books it
i think most would agree that the inclusion of something akin to ? on an
item scale creates problems ... but, the lack of having that ? does not
mean that all problems go away ... because, even in that case ... what does
a S do if they truly have not particular leaning one way or the other?
.
conservative parties on the other end by choosing a position somewhere in
the middle of an issue scale.
I am prepared to make the assumption that the L-R-scales or any of the other
issue scales are of an interval scale nature. All comparable studies in
political science have done the same. (I hear the sighs
13 matches
Mail list logo
