Validity issues in the Likert and Thurstone approaches to attitude measurement
Validity issues in the Likert and Thurstone approaches to attitude measurement
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/00131649921969811
复制
发表时间：
1999-04-01
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Wedell, DH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Roberts, JS;Laughlin, JE;Wedell, DH
本文强调了理论之间的差异，李克特和瑟斯顿态度测量方法，并演示了这种差异如何导致不一致的态度估计个人最极端的意见。模拟数据和真实的数据对堕胎的态度来证明这种差异。结果表明，态度研究者应该，至少，投入更多的注意力在李克特态度问卷项目的实证反应特征。最多，这些结果表明，其他方法，如瑟斯顿技术或其最近开发的项目反应理论的对应物之一，应被用来从不同意，同意的反应来获得态度估计。
This article highlights the theoretical differences between the Likert and Thurstone approaches to attitude measurement and demonstrates how such differences can lead to discrepant attitude estimates for individuals with the most extreme opinions. Both simulated data and real data on attitude toward abortion are used to demonstrate this discrepancy. The results suggest that attitude researchers should, at the very least, devote more attention to the empirical response characteristics of items on a Likert attitude questionnaire. At most, these results suggest that other methods, such as the Thurstone technique or one of its recently developed item response theory counterparts, should be used to derive attitude estimates from disagree-agree responses.