ATTITUDES TUTORIAL

PSY004-1

Background:
This tutorial follows on from Joseph’s lecture on Attitudes.

Lecture learning outcomes:

• 1. Define the concept of attitudes.

• 2. Identify the main components of attitudes.
• 3. Explain how attitudes are formed.
• 4. Explain how attitudes can be measured and how some specific methods
work.

Reading: Hogg, Chapter 5.

TODAY’S TUTORIAL (3 PARTS)

Part 1:

Consider this news story:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42718303

Answer the following questions:

1) What was being measured (which constructs)?
2) Who was the study population?
3) What conclusions were reached?
4) How was the study conducted (e.g. what kinds of measures/scales were
used)?
5) What are the advantages and disadvantages of the methods used (consider
validity, reliability, self-report, constructs and anything else).
Part 2:

Design your own Likert scale:

Things to consider:
1) Topic
2) Direction of attitude (for/against)
3) Intensity (strength of attitude)
4) How to choose statements
5) Validity
6) Reliability

GUIDANCE AND EXAMPLES FOR CONSTRUCTING A LIKERT SCALE (adapted from

http://psc.dss.ucdavis.edu/sommerb/sommerdemo/scaling/attitude.htm):

Constructing a Likert scale

The first step is to specify the attitude to be measured. In this example we will use attitude toward
mathematics.

Step 1. Collect statements

Generate as many statements as possible covering all aspects of the issue (both pro and con). Do in-
depth interviews on the topic, ask colleagues, survey the literature. Here are some examples:

  Maths is one of my worst subjects. I like doing maths.

  Maths is a science. Maths is an important subject to learn.
  I am no good at maths. I got good grades in maths.
  I need mathematics for my future career. Maths is difficult for me.
  I am confident that I can learn maths.
  I can handle most subjects, but not maths.
  These days maths instruction at the high school level is of poor quality.
  I will not need much maths when I get out of school.

Step 2. Judge direction

For this step you need to recruit some judges. You will ask them to rate the
direction of the statement. Does the statement reflect a positive or negative
attitude toward maths?

For example:

Instructions: Please rate each of the following items with regard to its favourability toward maths
(circle the appropriate number). Do not respond in terms of your own agreement or disagreement with
the statements; rather, respond in terms of the judged degree of favourableness or unfavourableness.
  Very Neutral/Unable Very
Item Unfavorable Favorable
unfavorable to judge favorable
1 Math is one of
. my worst 1 2 3 4 5
subjects.
2 Math is a
1 2 3 4 5
. science.
3 I am confident
. that I can learn
math. 1 2 3 4 5

Step 3. Discard neutral (or unable to judge) statements

Keep only the items where at least 90% of the judges agree as to direction (favourability rating).
Eliminate the statements rated as Neutral/Unable to judge, or those for which judges differ in their
opinions (less than 90% agreement). The following statements are not directly for or against math and
would be eliminated

Maths is a science.
These days maths instruction at the high school level is of poor quality.

Step 4. Format items to measure intensity.

NOTE the different instructions and labels at the top of the columns.
This is how the final attitude scale will be presented to respondents.

Instructions: Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following items (circle the
appropriate number).

  Strongly Strongly
Item Disagree Neutral Agree
disagree agree
1. Math is one of my worst
1 2 3 4 5
subjects.
2. I am confident that I can
1 2 3 4 5
learn math.
3. Math is difficult for me.
1 2 3 4 5

Counterbalance the items by alternating positive and negative statements. It is OK to have more of one
type than the other, but be sure to mix them up on the form.

Step 5. Pilot test (pre-test)

Before printing the final version, pretest the form on a few people that will not be in your final sample.
There will ALWAYS be something that needs to be corrected - unclear directions, an ambiguous item,
incorrect numbering, typos, etc. It is best to find them before you print hundreds of copies.
Scoring

After the respondent fills out the attitude survey, the researcher must reverse score the negative items
(determined in Step 2 above) so that all of the individual item scores lie on the same scale with regard
to direction. In reverse scoring, the 5 becomes 1, 4 becomes 2, 3 stays the same, 2 becomes 4 and 1
becomes 5. The reason is that we want to obtain a single score reflecting the intensity in a single
direction - that is, we want a high overall score to reflect a positive attitude and a low overall score to
indicate a negative attitude. If someone strongly agrees with "Math is difficult for me," the attitude
toward math is negative. Although the person has circled 5 on the form, that item (being negative) is
scored as a 1.

After the scores on the negative items are reversed, sum the individual ratings. Either a total score or
the average is used to characterize the individual's attitude.

Validating the scale

There are 3 ways to demonstrate that a Likert scale is valid, that is, that it measures the attitude that it
purports to measure in a credible way.

Item/whole score comparison

The form with all the statements is given to at least 100 respondents. For the final scale, keep only
those statements that differentiate between the highest-scoring 25% (most positive toward math) and
the lowest-scoring 25% (most negative toward math) of respondents. A drawback of this approach is
that it requires generating a lot of items, in order to be sure to have some that differentiate the two
extreme attitude groupings.

External criteria

Locate groups of people likely to have strong attitudes for and against the issue, for example
engineering versus art history majors with regard to the importance of mathematics. Collect their
opinions, and, as above, for the final attitude scale keep only the statements that differentiated the
engineers from the art historians.

Factor analysis

Factor analysis is a statistical technique for identifying items that hang together. It requires a large
sample, and knowledge of the statistical procedure.

General points regarding Likert scales

Respondents rate their degree of agreement with the statement. Their response shows both the direction
(for or against) and intensity (strength) of their attitude.

All statements on the scale must be either positive or negative. The respondents may feel neutral about
the statement, but the statement itself cannot be neutral.

Wording on the alternatives can vary, as can the direction. The numbers can go in either direction, but
keep the direction the same for all the items.

Strongly Disapprove Uncertain Approve Strongly

 disapprove approve
1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree
disagree
1 2 3 4 5
Slightly Neither favor nor Slightly
Favor Oppose
favor oppose oppose
5 4 3 2 1

If the neutral or uncertain category is omitted, the item becomes a forced choice option. Some
researchers assume that everyone has an opinion on everything and therefore should not be allowed to
avoid making a choice. Others feel that the respondent may indeed feel neutral towards something, and
should be given that response option.

How many alternatives? The consensus is that 5-7 works best, but the rule is not rigid. Sometimes
having 3 alternatives -- Agree, Neutral, Disagree -- may be sufficient. In other cases the number can be
extended to 9 or 11. Increasing the number is useful when respondents are likely to avoid checking the
extreme options.

Limitations

All items, regardless of intensity, are given the same weight. With regard to the final attitude score,
strongly agreeing with "I am confident I can learn maths" carries the same weight at strongly agreeing
with "Maths is an important subject to learn."

The format does not lend itself to dealing with mixed or complex attitudes. For example, "Maths is an
important skill for computer programming, but of less use in politics." Statements that fit the
requirements for a Likert scale may not be getting at more complex attitudes and feelings.

Attitude scales are of limited validity. They don't predict behaviour very well. Words on a printed page
or computer screen bear little resemblance to actual situations. Opinions on a topics such as marijuana
use or hate speech restrictions are complex and multidimensional. They might not be reducible to a
series of one dimensional items. As with questionnaires in general, self-reports of attitudes and
behaviour are strongly influenced by the context, format, and wording of items.

A scale can be useful when included on a questionnaire along with additional items for increasing
validity, for example, using an attitudes toward marijuana scale, along with open-ended questions
about when marijuana use might be OK, who should have access, or how its use affects communities.
Part 3:

One criticism of attitude scales is that they necessarily rely on self-report.

Drawing on information provided in the lecture, consider how you might

augment findings from your likert surveys with other measures (e.g.
physiological measures, IAT (implicit association test). Consider any
advantages/disadvantages of this approach (e.g. the study might uncover
discrepancies between stated and actual attitudes).

Design a study of which your scale is only one part.

Consider what other data you might want to gather (specific demographics), and
the design of your study (might you measure attitudes just once, several times, at
the same time each day for a period of time, after specific events etc.…).

Consider real world applications of your scale – market research, politics, PR (for
example, consider the methodology that may have been behind the army’s recent
recruitment advertisements which focus on the availability of emotional and
psychological support for recruits (as opposed to the focus of previous ad
campaigns promoting opportunities, leadership and excitement).