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