Are the Steps on Likert Scales Equidistant? Responses on Visual Analog Scales Allow Estimating Their Distances

12Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A recurring question regarding Likert items is whether the discrete steps that this response format allows represent constant increments along the underlying continuum. This question appears unsolvable because Likert responses carry no direct information to this effect. Yet, any item administered in Likert format can identically be administered with a continuous response format such as a visual analog scale (VAS) in which respondents mark a position along a continuous line. Then, the operating characteristics of the item would manifest under both VAS and Likert formats, although perhaps differently as captured by the continuous response model (CRM) and the graded response model (GRM) in item response theory. This article shows that CRM and GRM item parameters hold a formal relation that is mediated by the form in which the continuous dimension is partitioned into intervals to render the discrete Likert responses. Then, CRM and GRM characterizations of the items in a test administered with VAS and Likert formats allow estimating the boundaries of the partition that renders Likert responses for each item and, thus, the distance between consecutive steps. The validity of this approach is first documented via simulation studies. Subsequently, the same approach is used on public data from three personality scales with 12, eight, and six items, respectively. The results indicate the expected correspondence between VAS and Likert responses and reveal unequal distances between successive pairs of Likert steps that also vary greatly across items. Implications for the scoring of Likert items are discussed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

García-Pérez, M. A. (2024). Are the Steps on Likert Scales Equidistant? Responses on Visual Analog Scales Allow Estimating Their Distances. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 84(1), 91–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231164316

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free