000			01769pab a2200205 454500
008			140923b0 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_cWelingkar Institute of Management Development & Research, Mumbai _aWelingkar Institute of Management Development & Research, Mumbai
041			_aENG
082			_a _bSwa
100			_aSwain Scott D
245			_aAssessing Three Sources of Misresponse to Reversed Likert Items
250			_a1
260			_a _bFeb 2008 _c0
300			_a116-131 Pp.
490			_vXLV
520			_aData collected through multi-item Likert scales that contain reversed items often exhibit problems, such as unexpected factor structures and diminished scale reliabilities. These problems arise when respondents select responses on the same side of the scale neutral point for both reversed and nonreversed items, a phenomenon the authors call misresponse. Across four experiments and an exploratory study using published data, the authors find that misresponse to reversed Likert items averaged approximately 20%, twice the level identified as problematic in previous simulation studies. Counter to prevailing thought, the patterns of misresponse and response latency across manipulated items could not be attributed to respondent inattention or acquiescence. Instead, the pattern supports an item verification difficulty explanation, which holds that task complexity, and thus misresponse and response latency, increases with the number of cognitive operations required for a respondent to compare a scale item with his or her belief. The observed results are well explained by the constituent comparison model.
650			_aMeasurement, Likert Scales,
856			_uhttp://192.168.6.13/libsuite/mm_files/Articles/AR9579.pdf
906			_a28330
999			_c29456 _d29456