A ssignment 01: Procedural Booklet

Information
IMPORTANT NOTE Please note that you have to submit this assignment online via
myModules.

Also, note that you have to activate your myLife.unisa.ac.za

email address. If this address is not activated, you will not be
able to partake in the course.

You have to submit at least one of the assignments in this

module before the end of May for examination admission.
This is a university requirement.

Your final mark consists of an examination mark and a year

mark. The examination mark is the mark obtained in the
examination paper written at the end of the course. The year
mark is the mark obtained for the assignments you submitted
during the year. The examination mark counts 80% of the
final mark and the year mark 20% of the final mark. All
assignments contribute towards your year mark. Because
there are a number of assignments, the contribution of each
assignment is quite small. For example, if an assignment
contributes 20% towards the year mark, its actual contribution
towards the final mark is 4%.

Project A scenario is provided for which a psychological

questionnaire is required. The questionnaire consists of 10
questionnaire items (see Assessment 01 on myModules) and
is based on TWO personality theories (5 questionnaire items
per theory). The questionnaire has to be assessed to determine
whether the questionnaire items and the personality theories
on which they are based are fit the purposes of the
questionnaire. You assess the questionnaire items using the
review scale provided on pp. 27 – 33 of this assignment
booklet.

Time required 1 week

Unique number 612552

Submission Due date Contribution to year Contribution to final

mark mark

24 April 20% 4 marks

Page 1 of 33
T ask
Assignment 01
Task Assess whether the questionnaire items (see Assessment 01 on
myModules) in a psychological questionnaire are formulated
correctly.

Method to follow to 1. Read the questionnaire scenario (contained in this booklet).

complete this 2. Consider the proposed questionnaire items (see Assessment 1
assignment on myModules for the items).
3. Study the resource called: The social cognitive learning
approach (in the prescribed book).
4. Study the resource called: The self-actualisation theory of
Abraham Maslow (in the prescribed book).
5. Study the resource called: Review scale (contained on pp. 6 - 10
in this booklet).
6. Study the resource called: Notes on review criteria (contained in
this booklet).
7. Study the resource called: Questionnaire item types (contained
in this booklet).
8. Answer the assignment questions for Assignment 01 online on
myModules (see the assignment questions [review scale] in this
booklet on pp. 27 - 33).
9. Submit the MCQ answers on myModules as Assignment 01 for
PYC4804.
10. Remember if your myLife.unisa.ac.za email address is not
activated you will not be able to partake in the course.

Resource material Assignment 01 Procedural Booklet (this document):

- Questionnaire scenario
- Review scale
- Notes on the review criteria
- Questionnaire item types
- Assignment questions

myModules: Assessment 01
- Proposed questionnaire items

Prescribed book:
- Chapter 10: The social cognitive learning approach
- Chapter 11: The self-actualisation theory of Abraham
Maslow

Page 2 of 33
Q uestionnaire scenario
Assignment 01
You own a company specialising in psychological consultation. The company is called
PsyConsulting. You employ a number of professional psychologists, as well as student
psychologists who do their practical at the organisation.

At PsyConsulting every day begins with a morning meeting to discuss the business of the day.
The meeting is attended by qualified psychologists working for your organisation as well
as the student psychologists. You chair the meeting.
You inform everybody that you met with the directors at the South African Parks Board
(SAPB) the previous day. As has been widely reported in the news, rhino poaching in South
African game reserves has increased drastically in the past few years. In an attempt to combat
illegal poaching activities, the SAPB has been tasked with assembling a specialist anti-
poaching unit. The unit will be responsible for implementing anti-poaching protocols in three
of South Africa’s game reserves. The success of the anti-poaching unit depends on the
selection of suitably qualified and experienced game rangers.

Applicants have to hold a diploma in nature conservation (or equivalent) and be English
literate. Apart from being suitably qualified, rangers also have to be of a particular
psychological and behavioural profile. This profile requires that successful candidates have
the ability to manage a high-risk and psychologically demanding job. Applicants are profiled,
using psychological questionnaires specifically developed for this purpose. SAPB approached
PsyConsulting to assist them in ensuring the suitability of the questionnaires required for
selecting and recruiting the rangers.

Due to the high-risk nature of the work candidates need to be screened thoroughly for
psychological stability. This makes the selection process very difficult, especially because hard
evidence has to be produced to justify the selection of some candidates and the rejection of
others. This requires scientific and objective procedures.

The questionnaires that are to be used for screening and selection purposes were obtained
from a recruitment agency based in Australia. SAPB conducted a pilot study in which they
used the questionnaires. The pilot study showed that 10 items in the questionnaires may not
be suitable. Therefore, SAPB wants PsyConsulting to review these questionnaire items.

Discussing the problem …

Martha: So, there are 10 questionnaire items that may be problematic.

You: Yes, and we have to determine what may be wrong with them.
Sandra: I presume the questionnaires are psychological in nature, that is they are based
on proper theory?
You: Yes, the questionnaires are based on psychological theory. The
appropriateness of these theories is part of what we have to look at in our
review of the items.
Martha: And I assume we have to consider this in relation to the purpose of the
instruments?
are intended for.

Page 3 of 33
You: Exactly! I obtained the statistical information generated by the pilot study.
So, I suggest we focus on those questionnaire items that look really bad in
terms of their statistical indicators.

Assess new items to be included in the two questionnaires required by SAPB.

SAPB acquired two questionnaires for screening applicants for positions as game
rangers working in the anti-poaching unit. These questionnaires were developed and
tested in Australia. As such not all items are necessarily suitable for use in an
international context. In fact, a pilot study showed that at least 10 items (five in each of
the two questionnaires) need to be replaced with new items.

Martha obtained the relevant materials from SAPB and compiled the test specifications
outline. She gives the specification outline to the student psychologists, and tasks them
with formulating new questionnaire items.

Test specification outline

All applicants who qualify on the basis of their academic qualifications are invited to
partake in the selection processes. Psychological profiling forms a major component of
the selection process.
Applicants are selected for a psychologically demanding job, which calls for personal
strength. These individuals have to be self-reliant, personally driven and willing to take
control of their circumstances. They also need to work well as part of a team: Together,
the game rangers have to engage challenges, following prescribed protocols and
specialised methods when they are out in the bush.
Two questionnaires were obtained by the SAPB to identify individuals who display the
psychological profile required for the job. The first questionnaire is the Learning
Behaviour Questionnaire (LBQ) and is based on social cognitive learning theory. The
second questionnaire that is used to screen applicants for the job is the Self-Actualisation
Questionnaire (SAQ) and is based on the Maslow’s theory of needs gratification.

Assessing for internal locus of control, self-efficacy and learning through self-
regulation: The relevance of social cognitive learning theory
From a social cognitive learning theory perspective, behaviour occurs in the interaction
between the person (person variables) and the situation (environmental factors). Working
as part of the anti-poaching unit requires the ability to be self-directed and a willingness
to take responsibility for personal actions. In other words, the required set of personality
variables refers to individuals who are self-reliant, personally driven and willing to take
control of their circumstances. The person who is likely to produce this kind of behaviour
is somebody who maintains an internal locus of control, has a high level of self-efficacy,
and tends to learn through self-regulation. The items based on this theory must therefore
succeed in identifying: (1) individuals who believe that they can exercise personal control
over their circumstances (i.e., individuals with an internal locus of control), (2)
individuals who perceive themselves as personally able to do so (individuals with a high
self-efficacy perception), and (3) individuals who manage their behaviour in a self-

Page 4 of 33
reflecting and self-regulatory manner (individuals who learn through self-regulation).
(Note that the purpose of the questionnaire based on social cognitive learning theory is
to identify respondents who have an internal locus of control, a high self-efficacy
perception and who learn through self-regulation.)

Assessing for optimal development: The relevance of Maslow’s theory.

Maslow’s theory explains human behaviour in terms of need gratification. People have
certain basic needs which are hierarchically arranged. These deficiency needs are
biological, safety, love and esteem needs. These must be satisfied regularly in order for
the need for self-actualisation, which is at the top of the hierarchy, to become apparent.
The tendency towards self-actualisation is the underlying motive of all behaviour. When
functioning at the level of self-actualisation, growth motivations come to the fore.
Optimally developed individuals are motivated by these meta-needs which include the
need for autonomy, self-acceptance (and acceptance of others) and resistance against
enculturation.
Questionnaire items based on Maslow’s theory must identify individuals whose
behaviour and personality characteristics resemble the optimally developed person as
closely as possible. In specific, individuals applying to work as game rangers, therefore,
need to demonstrate (1) that their deficiency needs are being met regularly and that they
are functioning optimally; (2) that they live their lives according to strict ethical and
moral codes, (3) that they function relatively autonomously and resist convention, and
(4) that they are involved in some calling not directed at the satisfaction of their own
needs but that serves some greater cause or purpose. (Note that the purpose of the
questionnaire based on Maslow’s theory is to identify respondents whose deficiency
needs are met on a regular basis, who live their lives according to strict ethical and moral
codes, who function relatively autonomously and who are involved in some calling not
directed at the satisfaction of their own basic) needs but that serves some greater
purpose.)

Assess new items to be included in the two questionnaires required by SAPB.

The student psychologists submit the new items they formulated for the questionnaires.
The items are provided under Assessment 01 on myModules. You use the assessment
criteria and the rating scale provided in this booklet to review the proposed items.

However, before reviewing the questionnaire items you are required to equip yourself
with the knowledge necessary to complete this activity. As outlined in Assignment 01
‘Task’ above, the method you are required to follow to complete the assignment
necessitates that you work through a number of resources before you can rate the
questionnaire items. Please see the “Method to follow to complete this assignment” on
p. 2 of this document above. Study the required resources (Social cognitive learning
theory and Maslow’s theory in the prescribed book; the resource ‘Review scale’ in this
booklet; the resource ‘Notes on the review criteria’ in this booklet; and the resource
‘Questionnaire item types’ in this booklet). Only once you have studied these resources
should you attempt to review the questionnaire items on myModules.

Page 5 of 33
R eview Scale
Resource material
The review scale is used to assess interview questions as well as questionnaire items. In the
case of an interview, one refers to ‘a question’, and in the case of a questionnaire one refers to
‘an item’.
Each question (in the case of an interview) or each item (in the case of a questionnaire) is
reviewed. For example, an interview involving 10 questions has 30 review ratings – three
ratings for each question/item used in the interview/questionnaire.

Here are the generic items of the review scale.

1. The item/question is formulated correctly if:

a the item/question is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon

b the item/question is not leading
c the item/question is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

2. The item/question is grounded in theory if:

a the theory the item/question is based on is correct

b the item/question implements the theory it is based on correctly
c the item/question operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if: not a

Rate 2 if: a
Rate 4 if: a+b
Rate 5 if: a+b+c

3. The item/question qualifies for practical use if:

a the item/question is comprehensible by those it is intended for

b the item/question serves the purpose of the interview
c the item/question is valid in practice
d the item/question is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if: not a + not b

Rate 2 if: a or b
Rate 3 if: a+b
Rate 4 if: a+b+c
Rate 5 if: a+b+c+d

Page 6 of 33
Interview questions and questionnaire items

The review scale is used to review interview questions as well as questionnaire items. The only
difference between interview questions and questionnaire items is the format or structure of
the questions. Interview questions may be broader questions, requiring more lengthy and
detailed responses, whereas questionnaire items may be more structured and require the
respondent to select answers from predefined lists or scales. In an interview, one may formulate
follow-up questions in light of the respondent’s answer to a previous question, whereas
questionnaires contain a fixed set of items. However, in the case of both interviews and
questionnaires, the interview questions and the questionnaire items should be:
- formulated correctly
- grounded in theory
- suitable for practical use.

The components of the review scale

The review scale consists of review criteria and rules to determine ratings. The criteria refer to
the aspects or features one has to look for when reviewing an interview question (or
questionnaire item). The rating rules are rules that indicate how criteria have to be combined
to obtain a particular rating.

Review criteria

One needs assessment criteria to review an interview or a questionnaire. Below are the criteria
that are used to assess the quality of an interview question/questionnaire item with reference to
its generic qualities, namely formulation, theoretical groundedness and practical use. The
criteria are numbered ‘a’, ‘b’, ‘c’, etcetera. (When these criteria are used to assess the quality
of a questionnaire item one refers to ‘the item’ instead of ‘the question’).

1. The question/item is formulated correctly if:

a the question/item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
b the question/item is not leading
c the question/item is not ambiguous

2. The question/item is grounded in theory if:

a the theory the question/item is based on is correct
b the question/item implements the theory it is based on correctly
c the question/item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

3. The question/item qualifies for practical use if:

a the question/item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
b the question/item serves the purpose of the questionnaire/interview
c the question/item is valid in practice
d the question/item is reliable in practice

Rating rules

Review or assessment criteria can be used to construct an assessment scale. An assessment

scale assigns values (called ratings) to particular combinations of assessment criteria. The

Page 7 of 33
ratings range from 1 to 5. A rating of 1 is ‘very poor’ because none (or few) of the criteria are
met. A rating of 5 is ‘very good’ because all the criteria are satisfied.

Here are the rules for combining the criteria that are used to determine whether a question/item
has been formulated correctly:

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

- The first rule states that a rating of 1 is assigned if none of the criteria have been met.
- The second rule states that a rating of 2 is assigned if any ONE of criteria ‘a’, ‘b’, or ‘c’ has
been met.
- The third rule states that a rating of 4 is assigned if any TWO of criteria ‘a’, ‘b’, or ‘c’ have
been met.
- The fourth rule states that a rating of 5 is assigned if criteria ‘a’, ‘b’, AND ‘c’ have been
met.

Although a 5-point scale offers five possible ratings, namely 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, all ratings are not
always used. The lowest value (in this case 1) and the highest value (in this case 5) are always
defined, but some of the values in between may be left undefined. For example, if no rule is
provided for rating 3 (as is the case with this set of criteria), the only possible ratings would be
1, 2, 4 or 5. No rating of 3 can be given.

Here are the rules for combining the criteria that are used to determine whether a question has
been grounded in theory:

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

- The first rule states that a rating of 1 is assigned if criterion ‘a’ is not met.
- The second rule states that a rating of 2 is assigned if criterion ‘a’ is met.
- The third rule states that a rating of 4 is assigned if criteria ‘a’ and ‘b’ are met.
- The fourth rule states that a rating of 5 is assigned if criteria ‘a’, ‘b’ and ‘c’ are met.

As was the case with the first set of criteria related to the formulation of the item above, not all
ratings are used with this set of criteria. The lowest value (in this case 1) and the highest value
(in this case 5) are always defined, but some of the values in between may be left undefined.
For example, there is no rule provided for rating 3, so the only possible ratings would be 1, 2,
4 or 5. No rating of 3 can be given.

Here are the rules for combining the criteria that are used to determine whether a question
qualifies for practical use.

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b

Page 8 of 33
Rate 4 if a+b+c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

The criteria are combined by means of ‘+’ and ‘or’. Thus ‘a + b’ means both criterion ‘a’ and
criterion ‘b’ are met, and ‘a’ or ‘b’ means either criterion a or criterion b is satisfied. In the case
of ‘not a + not b’ neither criterion ‘a’ nor criterion ‘b’ is met. Hence:

- The first rule states that a rating of 1 is assigned if neither criterion ‘a’ nor criterion ‘b’ are
met.
- The second rule states that a rating of 2 is assigned if either criterion ‘a’ or ‘b’ has been
met.
- The third rule states that a rating of 3 is assigned if both criteria ‘a’ and ‘b’ have been met.
- The fourth rule states that a rating of 4 is assigned if criteria ‘a’, ‘b’, AND ‘c’ have been
met.
- The fifth rule states that a rating of 5 is assigned if ALL of ‘a’, ‘b’, ‘c’, ‘d’, and ‘e’ have
been met.

IMPORTANT NOTE:
In order to judge whether an item/question meets the criteria in the rating scale, you first need
to know what each criterion in the scale refers to – in this respect you have to study the ‘Notes
on the review criteria’ (See Assignment 01 Procedural Booklet pp. 11-20) – you cannot judge
whether an item is leading if you do not know what a leading item looks like. Similarly, you
cannot judge whether an item is ambiguous if you don’t know what ambiguity refers to – all
the criteria in the rating scale have been unpacked on pp. 11-20 of Assignment 01 Procedural
Booklet. It is VITAL to understand what the criteria refer to if you are going to provide correct
ratings.

How to use a rating scale

Suppose you want to assess whether a question (in the case of an interview) or an item (in the
case of a questionnaire) is grounded in theory (see Item 2 above). Then note the following:
Firstly, that rating 3 is not defined so you cannot offer a rating of 3 with regard to whether a
question/item is grounded in theory. Therefore, the only valid ratings are 1, 2, 4 or 5. Secondly,
the criteria are combined in a manner that sets up prerequisites. Criterion ‘a’ is required for
ratings 2, 4 and 5. Therefore, criterion a is a prerequisite for criteria ‘b’ and ‘c’. Criterion ‘b’
is required for ratings 4 and 5. As such, it is a prerequisite for criterion ‘c’. These prerequisites
are set up for a reason. If the theory that informs the question (criterion ‘a’) is not correct, the
question cannot be a correct implementation of theory (criterion ‘b’), and one cannot expect
the question to function or operate correctly in terms of the theory on which it is based (criterion
‘c’). In other words, if ‘a’ is not correct one cannot consider ‘b’ and ‘c’, and if ‘b’ is not correct,
‘c’ cannot be considered.
Rating scales do not only provide ratings. They are also used to generate comments that are
associated with particular ratings. For example, suppose a question’s grounding in theory is
rated 4, which means criteria ‘a’ and ‘b’ are met. This generates the following comment:

Although the theory the question is based on is correct, and the question implements the theory
correctly, it does not operate correctly in terms of the theory on which it is based. It does not
operate correctly because …. (add an explanation to indicate how the question fails to operate
correctly).

Page 9 of 33
How to conduct a review

The exercise of reviewing interview questions/questionnaire items is an integral part of your

coursework in this module. The objective is to expose you to an experience through which you
can learn to assess the quality of psychological interview questions/questionnaire items and
thus improve your competency in writing interview questions/questionnaire items. This is an
important exercise to help you prepare for the examination in Personology.
We understand only too well that the peer review procedure may make you feel exposed and
vulnerable, but remember, peer review is the cornerstone of academic life. Risking one’s point
of view, having it evaluated and receiving criticism is part of weaving the fabric of a healthy
academic life. Therefore, write as many comments and suggestions as you can think of for
these interview questions/questionnaire items. Simply ensure that your remarks are well
justified in terms of the review criteria. Also, consider your attitude. Do not think of yourself
as the person in power. Think of yourself as someone who works with the author of the
interview questions/questionnaire items in an attempt to improve the interview. Do not shy
away from offering your views, but in doing so, try not to put down the person on the receiving
end, or to let him/her have it! Engage a conversational tone. State where you disagree and
explain why, but also indicate where you agree. If you come across interesting material, or if
you find a particularly well put argument, or a train of thought that is elegantly presented, then
say so! In this exercise, we try to pass on to our students some of the fundamental characteristics
of a well-educated person, namely, to be able to tolerate different approaches and points of
view, but also not to be afraid to speak your mind, and to do so in a responsible and cordial
manner.

**Now that you are familiar with the elements of the review scale and how to go about
assigning ratings it is essential to study the Notes on the review criteria so that you know what
each criterion in the rating scale refers to. Please see the next page for the Notes on the review
criteria.

Page 10 of 33
N otes on review criteria
Resource material

1 Judge whether the question/item is formulated correctly

The question/item is formulated Consider:

correctly if:
a the question/item is formulated
in everyday language not using
psychological jargon
b the question/item is not leading
c the question/item is not
ambiguous
The way the question/item is formulated.
Ask:
Does the question/item show any of the indicated
problems with regards to its formulation?
Required knowledge and skills:
Knowledge of the kind of problems associated with
the formulation of questions/items, and the ability to
identify these problems.

Note 1.a Questions/items should not be phrased in terms of technical language and
specialist vocabulary. The questions used in psychological interviews and
psychological questionnaires are based on psychological theory. Such
questions are designed to elicit responses that can be interpreted in terms of
psychological theory. It is not easy to formulate questions that are based on
theory. These questions should be formulated in ordinary language, and not
make use of psychological jargon. But despite being formulated in ordinary
language the questions should still elicit information that can be interpreted in
terms of the underlying theory. The point to keep in mind is that the person
who is interviewed should understand the question without having any
knowledge of psychology.

Note 1.b The question should not be leading because leading questions introduce
response bias. A leading question is a question that hints at or suggests an
answer or guides the respondent to a particular answer. Consider this question,
for example: Do you believe one can use sexually abusive language even
though sexual abuse is prohibited by law? The second part of the question (that
sexual abuse is prohibited by law) informs the respondent that sexual abuse is
not allowed, which alerts the respondent to the fact that using sexually abusive
language may not be a good idea. This guides the respondent by hinting at a
particular answer. The respondent is more likely to indicate that one should not
use abusive language. This response is biased because the respondent reacts to
the hint and not to what he/she truly believes.

Note 1.c Ambiguous questions are items or questions that are not resolved when a
respondent responds to the question because it is not clear what the respondent
is thinking. Ambiguous items/questions include (a) double-response
items/questions and (b) items/questions that lack information required for
providing a proper answer.
(a) Consider the following ambiguous item:
Mark [yes] or [no] to indicate whether you agree or disagree that South

Page 11 of 33
 Africans have high levels of anxiety?
If the respondent, marks [yes] it is not clear whether he/she means: “Yes, I
agree”, or “Yes I disagree”. This also holds when the respondent marks [no].
This is an example of a double-response item/question (yes/no and
agree/disagree). One of these responses should be removed to make sure the
question is not ambiguous:
Mark [yes] or [no] to indicate whether you agree that South Africans have high
levels of anxiety?
Or Mark [agree] or [disagree] to indicate whether you agree or disagree that
South Africans have high levels of anxiety?
(b) Here is a second kind of ambiguous question:
Use the scale [1… 2 … 3 … 4] to indicate how much you feel in control of your
life.
If a respondent marks 1 it is not clear whether the respondent feels totally in
control or totally without control. The same holds for 4, and for any of the other
numbers on the scale, because the meaning of these numbers is not specified.
This is an example of a question that lacks information that is necessary for a
proper answer. The question would not be ambiguous if formulated in the
following way:
Use the scale [1… 2 … 3 … 4] (in which 1 means no control and 4 means total
control) to indicate how much you feel in control of your life.
Or use the scale [no control… little control … much control … total control]
to indicate how much you feel in control of your life.
A third source of ambiguity lies in the use of words such as ‘often’, ‘seldom’,
‘many’. These words hold different meanings for different people, i.e., for
person A, ‘seldom’ refers to once a week but for person B, ‘seldom’ refers to
once every few months. The same is true for ‘often’, ‘many’, ‘lots’, etc.

2 Judge whether the question/item is grounded in theory

The question/item is grounded in Required knowledge and skills:

theory if: Knowledge of relevant personality theory, and the
a the theory the question/item is ability to judge whether the theory is applied
based on is correct correctly.
b the question/item implements
the theory it is based on
correctly
c the question/item operates
correctly in terms of the theory
it is based on

a the theory the question/item is Consider:

based on is correct
The theory the question/item is based on and how
the question/item uses the theory.
Ask a:
Is the theory that is presented as justification for the
question/item correct?

Page 12 of 33
b the question/item implements Ask b:
the theory it is based on Is the theory correctly presented and translated into
correctly ordinary language in the formulation of the
question/item?

c the question/item operates Ask c:

correctly in terms of the theory Is the information that is elicited by the
it is based on item/question correct in terms of the theory?

Note 2 Criterion a is a prerequisite for criterion b, and criterion b is a prerequisite for

criterion c. If the theory the question is based on is not interpreted and
understood correctly the question cannot be formulated correctly in terms of
the theory. Also, the question cannot operate correctly in terms of the theory if
the theory is incorrect or if it is implemented incorrectly.

Note 2.a A psychological question should be formulated in ordinary language so that

people with no knowledge of psychology can understand the question and
respond to it appropriately. But a psychological question is psychological
because it is based on psychological theory. In other words, a psychological
question implements psychological theory. The purpose of the question is to
obtain information about the person being interviewed (the respondent) in
terms of the underlying psychological theory. Thus, a psychological question
aims to tap psychological information about the respondent. The first
requirement for a question to be theoretically justified is the correctness of the
theory that informs the question. If the theory is not correct the question cannot
be correct.

Note 2.b A psychological question is psychological because it is based on psychological

theory. This means the theory is implemented by the question. The question
translates the theory into everyday language. When respondents answer the
question, their responses can be interpreted in terms of the psychological theory
the question is based on. But this can only happen if the question implements
the theory correctly.
For example, consider Karen Horney’s theory. Suppose a question is meant to
implement the theory that a person moves towards others in healthy ways
(versus unhealthy ways). This notion needs to be translated into ordinary
language as respondents are unlikely to be familiar with the jargon ‘movement
towards others. This happens in the following question: ‘When things get
difficult, do you seek help from your colleagues?’ To seek help from one’s
colleagues is to approach others for assistance and move towards them in a
healthy way. When movement towards others becomes excessive and fixated
(and thus unhealthy) people seek permanent affection and support from others.
Horney classifies this kind of person as a submissive or compliant type who
acknowledges their own dependence on others and their own helplessness. This
represents unhealthy movement towards others. If you wanted to implement
this aspect of Horney’s theory you could ask a question such as “Do you need
the constant support, approval and validation of others?” This implementation
will identify someone of the submissive or compliant type whose movement

Page 13 of 33
 towards others is excessive and fixated.
Now consider the following question: ‘When things get difficult, do you prefer
to take control?’ This question does not implement the idea of moving towards
people. It implements a different aspect of Horney’s theory, namely the
tendency to move against others in healthy ways (in which people can be
assertive and display the ability to argue and differ from other people). When
movement against others becomes excessive and fixated it represents
unhealthy movement against others. A question that implements this unhealthy
movement against others is, for example, “Do you exploit others in the pursuit
of your own goals?” This is a characteristic behaviour pattern of the hostile
personality type so if the interviewer considers the question as a reflection of
Horney’s hostile personality type, the question would be a correct
implementation of the theory.
An example of a question that does not implement Horney’s psychoanalytic
theory correctly: ‘When things get difficult, do you seek help from your
colleagues before you take control?’ According to Horney, although, in healthy
development the individual has recourse to all three interpersonal styles on an
alternating basis, the different interpersonal styles are irreconcilable and
preclude one another in any particular situation – the person cannot
simultaneously move towards and away from others. On the grounds of
Horney’s theory, one does not expect somebody to move towards others
(seeking help) only to then move against them (taking control). Thus, the
question does not enable respondents to provide a valid answer in terms of
Horney’s theory and the question does not implement the theory correctly.

Note 2.c There is a difference between how a question implements theory and how it
operates in terms of the implemented theory. Implementation refers to how the
underlying theory is represented in the question, how it is translated into
ordinary language. For example, the psychological construct of ‘moving
towards others’ can be translated into ‘seeking help from colleagues’ (an
ordinary language statement). Operation goes further than reflection or
implementation of the underlying theory. It is about how the question works,
what it does with the theory, what distinctions are drawn in terms of the theory
as provided by the responses to the question/item. Think in terms of the
theoretical operation of the item/question. In other words, what does the
information that is elicited by the item/question tell you in terms of the theory?
Here you have to look at the response options made available by the responses
to the question/item. Look at the distinctions that are drawn by the
question/item to see if these distinctions can be meaningfully interpreted in
terms of the theory. The important thing to keep in mind is that this criterion
refers to how the item/question operates in terms of the theory. The focus is
therefore on what the item/question does with the theory – what distinctions
does the operation of the question/item make in terms of the theory?
The following examples of how questions operate are based on Karen Horney’s
theory, which distinguishes three kinds of interpersonal behaviour, namely
‘moving towards others’, ‘moving against others’ and ‘moving away from
others. Thus, they constitute three categories into which people can be
classified.

Page 14 of 33
 If one asks whether a person approaches colleagues for help when things get
difficult, the function of the question, the way in which it operates in terms of
Karen Horney’s psychoanalytic theory, is to identify healthy movement
towards others. The respondents who answer ‘yes’ confirm that they tend to
‘move towards others’. Respondents who deny the tendency to seek help from
colleagues do not tend to ‘move towards others’ and therefore may not display
this interpersonal style. Thus, the way in which the question operates is to
distinguish between people who move towards others in healthy ways and
those who do not. The question identifies movement towards others, but it does
not produce further information about those who do not display this
interpersonal style. Although its function is restricted, the question operates
correctly in terms of the theory it is based on.
Suppose the question used in the previous example is revised as follows:
‘When things get difficult, do you seek help from your colleagues, or do you
take control?’ In this form, the question elicits more information. It
differentiates between movement towards others (do you seek help from your
colleagues) and those who display the interpersonal style of movement against
others (do you take control). The question thus functions (operates) to
distinguish between movement towards others and movement against others.

3 Judge whether the question/item qualifies for practical use

The question/item qualifies for practical use
if:
a the question/item is comprehensible by
those it is intended for
b the question/item serves the purpose of
the interview/questionnaire
c the question/item is valid in practice
d the question/item is reliable in practice
Required knowledge and skills:
Knowledge of the nature of psychological
questions/item, and the ability to judge
whether such questions/items are fit for
purpose.

a the question/item is comprehensible by Consider:

those it is intended for The respondents that the question/item is
intended for.
Ask a:
Is the respondent likely to understand the
question/item?

b the question/item serves the purpose of Consider:

the interview/questionnaire The purpose of the interview/questionnaire
– that is, what the interview/questionnaire
Further refinement of criteria: is intended to be used for (which is to be
found in the scenario).
b the question/item serves the purpose of
the interview/questionnaire if:
b1 the question/item operates correctly in Ask b1:
Does the question operate correctly in
terms of the theory on which it is based
terms of the theory?
b2 the question/item generates

Page 15 of 33
 information that contributes toward
achieving the purpose of the
interview/questionnaire
c the question/item is valid in practice
Further refinement of criteria:
c the question/item is valid in practice if:
c1 the question/item is relevant in the
context in which the
interview/questionnaire is used
c2 the question/item is fair to all
respondents
d the question/item is reliable in practice
Further refinement of criteria:
d the question/item is reliable in practice
if:
d1 respondents are likely to attach the same
meaning to the question/item
d2 respondents are likely to provide the
same responses as before when asked
again at a later stage
Ask b2:
Does the question/item generate
information that contributes toward
achieving the purpose of the
questionnaire/interview
Consider:
The context in which the
interview/questionnaire is to be used.
Ask c1:
Is the question/item relevant in the context
in which the interview/questionnaire is to
be used?
Consider:
The nature of the respondents that the
question/item is intended for.
Ask c2:
Are these respondents equally able to
respond to this question/item, that is the
item is not biased in any way?
Consider:
The consistency of responses across
respondents.
Ask d1:
Are respondents likely to attach the same
meaning to the question/item i.e., are they
likely to understand the question/item in
the same way?
Consider
The consistency of responses over time.
Ask d2:
Are respondents likely to provide the same
responses as before when they are asked
the question/item again at a later stage?
Page 16 of 33
Note 3.a A question should be comprehensible by those it is intended for. The
difficulty with the item/questions we deal with here is that they are
psychological questions. A psychological question is a question that
implements psychological theory. When an interviewer asks a psychological
question, he/she tries to understand the respondent in terms of the
psychological theory that informs the question. But respondents do not
possess psychological knowledge. Therefore, the interviewer has to translate
psychological theory into ordinary language and phrase the questions in a
language that the respondents can understand. The language should be
familiar to respondents given their lived experiences. A question that contains
psychological jargon has not been properly translated and may therefore be
difficult to comprehend by those it is intended for. A question containing
psychological jargon is also not fair to all respondents, because respondents
with knowledge of psychology are in a better position to respond to such an
item/question i.e., the item/question has an educational bias.

A question/item cannot serve the purpose of an interview/questionnaire if it

Note 3.b does not correctly implement the theory it is based on and if it does not
operate correctly in terms of this theory.
To serve the purpose of the interview/questionnaire the information generated
by a question/item should contribute to the purpose of the
interview/questionnaire (the purpose of the questionnaire/interview is
communicated in the scenario). For example, if the purpose of the interview
is to differentiate people in terms of internal-external locus of control, the
questions used in the interview should address this matter. A question that
aims to distinguish individuals in terms of specific anxiety versus free-flow
anxiety clearly would not serve the purpose of this interview.
This does not mean that each question/item has to fully implement the
purpose of the interview/questionnaire, but all questions/items should
contribute towards the purpose of the interview/questionnaire although some
questions/items may fulfil only part of the overall purpose. For example, the
purpose of the interview may be to profile individuals’ behaviour in terms of
the tendencies to be directive, persuasive, conciliatory and compliant. But this
does not mean that each and every question in the interview should provide
information about all four of these aspects of behaviour. Some questions may
differentiate between the preference to direct and the preference to persuade,
whereas others could distinguish between the preference to direct and the
preference to comply. Each of these questions contributes information
towards the overall purpose of profiling an individual’s behaviour in terms of
these four behavioural preferences.
It is important to be clear about the overall purpose of an interview. Suppose
the purpose of an interview is only to differentiate between individuals with
a high preference to direct and persuade versus those with a high preference
to conciliate and comply. Then all questions in the interview should aim to
provide information about this particular distinction. Questions aimed at
delineating differences between the preference to direct and the preference to

Page 17 of 33
 persuade would be wasted because making this distinction does not contribute
to the purpose of the questionnaire.

Note 3.c To be valid, a question should be meaningful and appropriate given the
context in which the interview is used. If the purpose is to explore the
experience of stress in a particular kind of situation (e.g., the work
environment), the question should refer to the situation in question, and not
mention a different kind of situation (e.g., the home environment). It should
also refer to experiences that are likely to be encountered in the context in
question. If the interview is about experiences in the workplace, the questions
should be phrased in terms of behaviour and events that could reasonably be
encountered in the particular work environment.
The question should also be fair to all respondents. All respondents should
find the question appropriate and suitable. In other words, the question should
not be biased by advantaging some individuals and disadvantaging others. A
question is biased if the response given by the respondent depends on a
characteristic of the respondent that does not concern the purpose of the
question. Questions formulated using psychological jargon, for example, are
not fair to all respondents – those with knowledge of psychological
terminology are in a better position to be able to respond to questions
containing psychological jargon than respondents without knowledge of
psychology. Such a question has an educational bias towards people with
knowledge of psychological jargon.
Experience is a common source of bias. If individuals with particular
experiences find it easier to respond to an item/question the question is not
fair to those who do not have the experience, which means the question is
biased. For example, suppose an interviewer wants to establish whether a
respondent is inclined more towards internal locus of control than external
locus of control in an information technology environment, and asks: ‘Do you
think you prefer to work in XML because it allows you to control the structure
of a database instead of having to work within a predetermined structure?’
Although the question is contextually relevant in dealing with information
technology individuals who are experienced XML programmers are in a
better position to respond to the question than those who may not have XML
programming experience.
Other common sources of bias are gender, age and education. For example,
the purpose of a question may be to identify managers’ leadership styles.
However, if men are more likely than women to provide a particular response
the question has a gender bias. Questions about competence in information
technology often have an age bias because younger people are more likely
than older people to show competence in this regard. Questions involving
knowledge about a particular field often have an educational bias. These
kinds of questions are not fair because the responses given by respondents
depend on characteristics of the respondents (experience, gender, age,
education, etc.) that do not concern the purpose of the questions.

Note 3.d Reliability has to do with the consistency of responses. There are two kinds
of consistency, namely consistency across respondents and consistency over

Page 18 of 33
time.
Consistency across respondents is evident when all respondents attach the
same meaning to the item/question. Of course, this does not mean they all
provide the same answer. They have different opinions, and therefore
different answers, but they all have similar understandings of what the
question/item means. In other words, there is consistency in their
understanding of the question/item.
Respondents respond inconsistently when they do not attach the same
meaning to an item/question, which happens when the item/question is open
to different interpretations.
Ambiguous items/questions are unreliable because respondents do not
understand such questions in the same way and therefore their responses
cannot be compared to each other. In the case of double-response
items/questions, two respondents may provide the same response meaning
different things or may give different responses meaning the same thing.
For example, given the question: Select ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to indicate whether the
statement that you are a prolific reader is true or false:
1. Respondent A may say: YES, meaning that he/she is a prolific reader
(confirming that the statement is true)
2. Respondent B may say: YES, meaning that he/she is not a prolific reader
(confirming that the statement is false)
3. Or, Respondent B may say: NO, meaning that he/she is a prolific reader
(denying that the statement is false)

In (1) and (2) respondents A and B give the same response, but the responses
mean different things, and in (1) and (3) they give different responses, but the
responses mean the same thing. Inconsistency also occurs in the case of
questions that lack guidelines for responding properly. Respondents’
responses cannot be compared because there is no way to determine what
their responses actually mean when they make up and follow their own
guidelines for responding to an item/question.
A second source of inconsistent responses is questions that adverbs that
describe an indefinite frequency (e.g., often, seldom, and rarely). Although
each respondent offers definite answers to such questions, the answers
obtained from different respondents may not be comparable because
interpretations of such words may differ among respondents. For example,
the statement ‘I rarely sleep late’ may mean different things to different
individuals. People do not have the same interpretations of what ‘rarely’
means and what time ‘late’ refers to.
A third source for inconsistency is guessing. Guessing occurs when
respondents do not know how to respond to items/questions. Questions that
lack proper guidelines are one reason for guessing (respondents guess at how
to respond to such questions), but another reason is incomprehensibility.
When questions are incomprehensible respondents have to guess what the
questions actually mean. Responses based on guessing are inconsistent.
In addition to consistency across respondents, reliability also refers to
consistency over time. To be reliable a question should elicit a similar

Page 19 of 33
 response from a respondent when he/she is asked to respond to the
item/question again at a later stage. A question such as: “Do you feel angry?”
depends on the moment and context in which the question is asked. A
respondent who feels angry at the moment the question is put to him will say
‘yes’, but when the question is repeated later, the same respondent may say
‘no’. Thus, the question does not work in practice. A better question would
have been: “Do you feel angry when other people ignore you?” because this
question is likely to elicit the same response from a respondent when repeated
at a later stage.

But not all sources of bias involve the characteristics of the respondent. There
are also other factors that cause random or biased information. For example,
ambiguous items/questions are sources of random information. Respondents
respond randomly (i.e., not systematically) to an ambiguous item/question.
Leading questions are sources of biased information because the respondents’
responses are influenced by values and perceptions that do not involve
underlying theory.

** Now that you are familiar with the review criteria, study the different kinds of questionnaire
item types on pp. 21 – 26 in the Assignment 01 Procedural Booklet (below) so that you know
what kinds of items can be formulated in a psychological questionnaire.

Page 20 of 33
Q uestionnaire item types
Resource material
There are different kinds of questions (items) that can be included in a questionnaire. This
section describes three kinds of items, namely open items, closed items and rating scales.

Open items
Generally speaking, most items are either ‘open’ or ‘closed’. An open question is one that
allows the respondents to answer in any way they want to whereas a closed question is one
that offers respondents a limited choice of alternate replies. Thus, open or free-response items
are not followed by any kind of choice and the respondents provide their own answers that have
to be recorded in full. Psychological questionnaires mostly make use of closed items, allowing
for comparison across a large group of respondents.

An example of an open-ended question is “What do you think of the parole system in South
Africa?” It is important to phrase the question carefully if you want more than just a ‘yes’ or
‘no’ answer. If you had asked, “Do you agree with the parole system?” the respondent could
say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and provide nothing more.

The main advantage of open items is that respondents have the freedom to express their ideas
without the restrictions of set possible answers. Respondents may have ideas and opinions
that you have not thought of, and these might be lost if you ask a closed question. However,
open ended questions invariably elicit some irrelevant and repetitious information that cannot
be used and wastes time in processing them. Answering open ended questions also requires
a considerable degree of language proficiency and communication skills. For this reason,
they are not suitable for people with language difficulties or low levels of literacy.

Although open ended questions can give you a great deal of information, the disadvantage is
that they are difficult to analyse. If you want to compare the responses of a large group of
people, it may be better to use closed items for which all the respondents have the same choice
of answers (as is the case in psychological questionnaires).
Closed items
Although, generally speaking, the aim of an interview is to obtain rich, detailed information,
one can also make use of closed items in psychological interviews (such as a question that
requires a respondent to indicate a preference between two/more options, for example,
“Explain to me whether you prefer to plan ahead, or do you take every day as it comes?”).
Other examples of closed items would be those that offer simple choices, such as ‘yes’ or
‘no’, or a range of alternatives, such as five different brand names. They are considered
‘closed’ because the respondents do not have the freedom to answer any way they want to.

Closed questions of the yes/no type

Closed questions of the yes/no type merely require respondents to tick off the answer ‘yes’ or
‘no’, according to whether they agree with the statement or not. Here is an example of a closed
question of the yes/no type:

Page 21 of 33
I will vote in the December elections Yes No

Closed questions, true/false type

Similar to the yes/no question are those that require a true/false answer. For
example:
I believe in the death penalty True False
All women are potential rape victims True False
Closed questions, multiple choice type
Another example of a closed question requires the respondent to mark one of a limited
selection of possible answers, as follows:
In the municipal elections, I will vote ACDP □
ANC □
DA □
IFP □
Other □
This item, which is a form of a closed question, is also known as a multiple-choice
question (the respondent chooses from a number of given alternatives).
Rating scales
Rating scales are generally regarded as having a closed item format because the
respondent has a limited range of options (ratings) to choose from.

It is seldom useful to use single items or questions to measure complex or non-factual

topics such as opinions, beliefs, attitudes and values. These are complex issues that have
to do with states of mind rather than with behaviour or events in the outside world and are
therefore more difficult to measure. They are usually multifaceted and have to be
approached from different angles. Single items dealing with such topics are open to bias
and unreliability due to the way in which the questions are worded, the format of questions
and the effect of the context on the way in which the questions are interpreted and
answered. Therefore, instead of requiring single options (like ‘Yes’ or ‘No’), the tendency
is to use rating scales, which allow respondents a wider range of options (like ‘Absolutely
Yes’, ‘Possibly yes’, ‘Possibly no’, ‘Absolutely no’). Such questions usually take the form
of rating items. When a number of rating questions are used to assess the same topic or
concept, the group of rating questions constitute a rating scale. Thus, rating scales refer to
multi-item scales, that is, a group of items (questions) dealing with the same topic, with
each item requiring a rated response.

For each item in the rating scale, respondents have to indicate the extent to which
they agree or disagree with a statement by marking a point on a numerical scale. For
example, you could use a rating scale to investigate attitudes toward crime in South
Africa. Respondents would be required to rate their responses (by ticking the appropriate
box) to statements such as the following:

Strongly Disagree Do not Agree Strongly

Statement
disagree a little know a little agree

Page 22 of 33
 Crime is disrupting our lives

Police effectively curb crime

Note that, in the case of the scale above, the use of ‘a little’ (in Disagree and Agree a little) is
not ambiguous because it is clear that ‘Disagree a little’ indicates less agreement than
‘Strongly agree’. Similarly, ‘Agree a little’ indicates a weaker degree of agreement than
‘Strongly agree’. In other words, the responses across respondents can still be compared to
each other because the order of intensity of agreement/disagreement is the same across
respondents.

Ratings give a numerical value to some kind of assessment or judgement. We can apply
ratings to anything such as rating entrants in a competition, preferences for certain objects
or differentiating characteristics. For example, you might be asked to rate the service provided
by shop assistants on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = very bad service, 2 = poor service, 3 =
adequate service, 4 = good service and 5 = excellent service. You could also rate them in terms
of friendliness, appearance and efficiency.

Ratings are given numbers because it is easier to work with numbers than descriptions
when you have to analyse people’s responses. You can, for example, add together a
person’s ratings on a scale and compare one person’s total with another, or work out an
average for a particular group.

Although ratings are an attempt to provide an objective measure of a person’s attitude or

opinion, the main danger with ratings is the ease with which ratings can be influenced,
often by factors of which the respondent is not aware. Ratings may be influenced, for
example, by a person’s mood on the day the questionnaire is completed, or by political
events in the country at the time. However, this can also be the case with other types of
items.

The following guidelines can be followed when compiling a rating scale:

1 Define the dimension being rated. This means that you have to decide what it is that
you want respondents to rate. Each item or statement to be rated must refer to only
one thing or dimension. For example, if you ask respondents to “Rate the shop
assistant’s friendliness and efficiency” on a scale of 1 (bad) to 5 (good), you are
confusing two different dimensions: friendliness and efficiency. The respondent
might think that the shop assistant was very efficient but not at all friendly. The
respondent then does not know which rating to use.

2 Decide on the number of ratings for the scale. You may only need 3 but there may
be as many as 10. It depends on what is being rated. If you only need respondents
to indicate whether they agree, are neutral or disagree, then you only need 3 ratings.
If, however, you feel that there may be a greater range of opinions, then you need
to provide more options (a range of 5 or more). For example, look at the following
statements regarding people’s reading habits:

Do you read books? Yes Sometimes No

Page 23 of 33
 1 2 3 4 5/more a
How often do
Never One in One a One a week
you read books? six month week
months

These two ratings give you different information. The first one gives you an
indication of whether respondents read books or not, which is fine if that is all you
want to know. It does not tell you much about the respondents’ reading habits. The
second one gives you a much better idea of their book reading habits. From this,
you can see that the number of ratings depends on what you want to find out.

3 Decide whether to use an even or uneven number of ratings. Many researchers prefer
an uneven number in order to have a neutral category in the middle, but the
problem is that people may tend to choose the neutral one (this is called the error of
central tendency).

4 Define the different rating categories. You must specify criteria for each rating so
that they are mutually exclusive. This means that each rating category should mean
something different so that the respondents do not have the problem of deciding
which rating category their responses fit into. For example, respondents are likely
to find the following scale ambiguous:

Agree a lot Agree Agree a Neutral Disagree a Disagree Disagree a

somewhat little little somewhat lot

There is nothing to indicate what the difference is between “agree somewhat” and
“agree a little”. Here is another example: you might want to know how many times a week
a respondent does physical exercise, and you provide the following rating categories 1
= none, 2 = two to three times, 3 = three or more times. If the respondent exercises three
times a week, what rating will he or she choose: a 2 or a 3? Each category or rating
must specify a particular kind of response that is not described by any other category or
rating.

A rating scale is a technique for placing people on a continuum in relation to each other,
in relative and not in absolute terms. These scales are not designed to yield subtle insights
into individual situations. Their main function is to classify people with regard to the topic
being rated. The ratings people provide on a rating scale can be correlated to other
characteristics they may have. For example, if one finds that the ratings provided by men
differ from those provided by women it means there is a relationship between the gender
of the person and how he/she rates the topic in question. Another example: One may
find that different age or different socio-economic groups have different totals on a scale
measuring attitudes to crime.

There are many different types of rating scales. We will only discuss two here, namely
Likert scales and semantic differential scales.

Likert scales
The Likert scale is also known as a summated scale. A summated attitude scale is a rating

Page 24 of 33
 scale on which an individual indicates how much he or she agrees (or disagrees) with
statements. These statements may deal with a particular social or political issue or
institution, such as communism, abortion, or a particular political party. However, they
may also deal with personal feelings, experiences and beliefs. Often only the endpoints of
such scales are labelled. The one on the left may be labelled ‘Disagree entirely’ and the
one on the right: ‘Agree entirely’. Subjects mark the point that reflects how much they
agree or disagree with the statement involved.

Here is an example of some items on a Likert scale. In this case personal beliefs
regarding one’s emotional experience are being investigated:

1 2 3 4 5
Statement Disagree Agree
entirely entirely
I find it easy to control my emotions
I get angry quickly
I often feel sad

The respondent marks the point that best reflects his or her attitude with regard to his/her
personal beliefs or experiences. The scores for each item or statement are then added up to
obtain a total score for the scale – and this is why it is referred to as a summated scale. When
using a summated scale, it is important to ensure that the scale is uni-dimensional, that is,
that all the items measure the same dimension or topic. In this example, all the items
measure opinions regarding personal emotional experience. If the following item were to
be included in the table above, the scale would not be uni- dimensional: “Others describe
me as a quick thinker”. The scale would not be uni-dimensional because the newly added
item refers to cognition (thinking speed) and not to emotion.

Note that the first two statements in the example provided above have been phrased in a
way that requires the respondent to provide ‘opposite’ or ‘reversed’ responses. For example,
people who agree that they can easily control their emotions will probably disagree that they
get angry quickly. It is important to phrase questions in a manner that requires opposite or
reversed responses in order to keep respondents from falling into a response pattern by simply
agreeing (or disagreeing) with every statement, without thinking about the question being
asked.

Likert scales usually have the option of 5 or 7 ratings. The advantage is that a number of ratings
(5 or 7 options) allow the respondent a larger range of opinions than just a yes/no answer.
Although most scales employ an uneven number of options (3, 5, or 7) there are possible
disadvantages to using an uneven number because people may tend to choose the midpoint
and then you do not know if the person is neutral, lukewarm, lacks knowledge about the
matter the question refers to, or lacks an attitude toward the issue in question.

Semantic differential
The semantic differential is a type of rating scale in which the scale endpoints are defined by
opposing adjectives (and not by ‘agree’ or ‘disagree’, as in the case of a Likert scale). There
are usually 7 or 9 points in between the two opposing adjectives. The respondents are

Page 25 of 33
required to indicate their positions on the scale by marking one of the points in between the
two adjectives. An example of a semantic differential is given below:

Controlled _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Uncontrolled
Hostile _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Friendly
Emotionally warm _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Emotionally cold
Expressive _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Reserved

The respondent marks the rating that expresses his/her opinion. Using the example of
emotional intelligence again, if the respondent thinks of him/herself as emotionally
controlled rather than emotionally uncontrolled he/she would place a mark on the first or
second space closest to ‘controlled’. If he/she thinks of him/herself as sometimes emotionally
reserved and sometimes emotionally expressive, then he/she is more likely to choose a
space in the middle. In this way a picture can be obtained of people’s opinions about their
personal emotional character in terms of various descriptors of emotion.

When one compiles a semantic differential scale, one should be careful to not always put the
positive extreme on one side and the negative on the other side. The location of positive and
negative poles should be random (sometimes positive on the left and negative on the right,
and sometimes the other way round) to counteract any response patterns that are not based
on the respondents’ assessments of each individual item. If all positive terms are on the left
and all negative terms are on the right, respondents may tick down the left side without paying
close attention to the questions.

It is also important that the two poles define the same construct. For example, if you want to
measure the construct of mood, your pole descriptors may be happy and sad. However, if
the two poles are described by ‘happy’ and ‘clever’, it is not clear whether you are measuring
the construct of mood (happiness) or cognitive ability (intellect). In addition, you should take
care that the two descriptors really are opposites. For example, sad/satisfied are not really
opposites because you can feel satisfied about something while still being sad.
Furthermore, it is important that respondents are clear that they need to respond to the item in
terms of BOTH poles of the construct. For example, if you want to assess job satisfaction, the
two poles of the construct ‘job satisfaction’ could be represented in the item as follows:

Satisfied □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Dissatisfied

If a respondent is totally satisfied in his/her job, s/he will place a tick in the leftmost box (the
tick box closest to ‘satisfied’). A tick in the leftmost box indicates BOTH complete satisfaction
and the absence of dissatisfaction. If a respondent is only slightly more satisfied than
dissatisfied s/he could tick the 4th tick box from the left. This response indicates that a
respondent is only marginally more satisfied than dissatisfied with his/her job. Again, the
response is made in terms of both constructs – the 4th tick box from the left is closer to the
‘satisfaction’ pole (4 tick boxes from the ‘satisfied’ pole) and further away from the
dissatisfaction pole (5 tick boxes away from the ‘dissatisfied’ pole). This indicates that a
respondent is (marginally) more satisfied but also somewhat dissatisfied. The response can
therefore be interpreted in terms of BOTH poles of the construct. If, on the other hand, a

Page 26 of 33
respondent is more dissatisfied than satisfied, s/he will provide a tick mark that is closer to the
‘dissatisfied’ pole and further away from the ‘satisfied’ pole.

Now that you have studied all the required resources to produce the first assignment
you can access the psychological questionnaire items on myModules (see
Assessment 01 on myModules). Use the review scale below to rate the questionnaire
items formulated by the student psychologists. You indicate your answers in the
multiple-choice quiz on myModules (Assessment 01).

A ssignment questions (Review scale)

Assignment 01
1. Item 1 is formulated correctly if:
(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

2. Item 1 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

3. Item 1 qualifies for practical use if:

(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

4. Item 2 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon

Page 27 of 33
 (b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

5. Item 2 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

6. Item 2 qualifies for practical use if:

(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

7. Item 3 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

8. Item 3 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

Page 28 of 33
9. Item 3 qualifies for practical use if:
(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

10. Item 4 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

11. Item 4 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

12. Item 4 qualifies for practical use if:

(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

13. Item 5 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon

Page 29 of 33
 (b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

14. Item 5 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

15. Item 5 qualifies for practical use if:

(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

16. Item 6 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

17. Item 6 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

Page 30 of 33
18. Item 6 qualifies for practical use if:
(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

19. Item 7 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

20. Item 7 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

21. Item 7 qualifies for practical use if:

(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

22. Item 8 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading

Page 31 of 33
 (c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

23. Item 8 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

24. Item 8 qualifies for practical use if:

(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

25. Item 9 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

26. Item 9 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

Page 32 of 33
27. Item 9 qualifies for practical use if:
(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

28. Item 10 is formulated correctly if:

(a) the item is formulated in everyday language not using psychological jargon
(b) the item is not leading
(c) the item is not ambiguous

Rate 1 if none of a, b, c
Rate 2 if one of a, b, c
Rate 4 if two of a, b, c
Rate 5 if a+b+c

29. Item 10 is grounded in theory if:

(a) the theory the item is based on is correct
(b) the item implements the theory it is based on correctly
(c) the item operates correctly in terms of the theory it is based on

Rate 1 if not a
Rate 2 if a
Rate 4 if a+b
Rate 5 if a+b+c

30. Item 10 qualifies for practical use if:

(a) the item is comprehensible by those it is intended for
(b) the item serves the purpose of the questionnaire
(c) the item is valid in practice
(d) the item is reliable in practice

Rate 1 if not a + not b

Rate 2 if a or b
Rate 3 if a+b
Rate 4 if a + b +c
Rate 5 if a+b+c+d

Page 33 of 33