IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels

  • B. WEIJTERS

    ()

  • E. CABOOTER
  • N. SCHILLEWAERT
  • -

Questionnaires using Likert-type rating scales are an important source of data in marketing research. Researchers use different rating scale formats with varying number of response categories and varying label formats (e.g., seven point rating scales labeled at the endpoints, fully labeled five point scales…), but have few guidelines when selecting a specific format. Drawing from the response style literature, we formulate hypotheses on the effect of the labeling of response categories and the number of response categories on net acquiescence response style, extreme response style and misresponse to reversed items. We test the hypotheses in an online survey (N=1207) with eight experimental conditions and a follow-up study with two experimental conditions (N = 226). We find evidence of strong effects of scale format on response distributions and misresponse to reversed items and formulate recommendations on scale format choice

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_10_636.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration in its series Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium with number 10/636.

as
in new window

Length: 60 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:10/636
Contact details of provider: Postal: Hoveniersberg 4, B-9000 Gent
Phone: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 34 61
Fax: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 35 92
Web page: http://www.ugent.be/eb

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:10/636. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nathalie Verhaeghe)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.