Why the Mean of Likert-Scaled Data Should Be Interpreted Using Rounding Off Rules:

A Commentary

Rogen A. Doronila
Notre Dame of Dadiangas University

Abstract

The interpretation of mean scores derived from Likert-scaled data is a common practice in social science research. However, the
use of conventional arithmetic means to interpret Likert data has been debated due to the ordinal nature of the scale. This
commentary explores the rationale behind interpreting the mean of Likert-scaled data using rounding off rules, highlighting the
implications for data interpretation, statistical analysis, and research validity. By adopting rounding off rules, researchers can
maintain the integrity of Likert data and ensure more accurate and meaningful interpretations.

Keywords: Likert scale, rounding-off rules, ordinal, mean, commentary

Introduction

The Likert scale, introduced by Rensis Likert in the 1930s, has become a widely used tool for measuring attitudes,
opinions, and behaviors in social science research. Its popularity stems from its simplicity, versatility, and ability to
capture nuanced responses through a series of structured statements or questions. Despite its widespread use, the
appropriate method for interpreting and analyzing Likert-scaled data has been a topic of ongoing debate among
researchers, methodologists, and statisticians.

Traditionally, the arithmetic mean has been the go-to method for summarizing and interpreting Likert-scaled data, as
it provides a single numerical value that represents the central tendency of the responses. However, the use of
arithmetic means to interpret Likert data has been challenged due to the ordinal nature of the scale. Unlike interval
or ratio scales, which assume equidistant intervals between values, the Likert scale's ordinal nature implies that the
response categories have a meaningful order but do not necessarily represent equidistant intervals. This commentary
aims to elucidate why the mean of Likert-scaled data should be interpreted using rounding off rules, providing
insights into its implications for data analysis, interpretation, and research validity.

This distinction has significant implications for data interpretation and analysis. When Likert data are interpreted
using conventional arithmetic means, it can lead to misleading conclusions and misrepresentations of respondents'
attitudes or opinions. Furthermore, the assumption of equidistant intervals may not hold true for Likert data, as the
distance between response categories may vary, leading to potential inaccuracies in the mean score and subsequent
analyses.

In recent years, there has been a growing recognition of the need for alternative approaches to interpreting Likert-
scaled data that better align with its ordinal nature. One such approach is the use of rounding off rules, such as
rounding to the nearest whole number or mode-based rounding. By adopting these rounding off rules, researchers
can preserve the ordinal structure of Likert data, ensure more accurate and meaningful interpretations, and minimize
the impact of outliers and extreme responses. Despite the potential benefits of adopting rounding off rules for Likert-
scaled data, there is a lack of consensus and clear guidelines on their use in research practice. This article aims to
address this gap by exploring the rationale behind interpreting the mean of Likert-scaled data using rounding off
rules, highlighting their implications for data interpretation, statistical analysis, and research validity. By providing a
comprehensive background on the topic, this article seeks to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on best practices for
interpreting and analyzing Likert-scaled data, ultimately aiming to enhance the quality and rigor of social science
research.

This commentary offers an in-depth exploration of the rationale behind interpreting the mean of Likert-scaled data using rounding off rules, without relying
on citations. By presenting a detailed analysis without citations, the commentary encourages critical thinking and reflection on the topic, inviting readers
to engage with the ideas presented and consider their applicability in their own research practices.
The Nature of the Likert Scale

The Likert scale is a type of ordinal scale that captures respondents' level of agreement or disagreement with a series
of statements or questions. Being ordinal, Likert scale is a type of categorical measurement scale that categorizes
responses into distinct, non-numeric categories with a meaningful order. Typically, it consists of five or seven
response options, ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree," with a neutral midpoint. The ordinal nature
of the Likert scale implies that the response categories have a meaningful order but do not necessarily represent
equidistant intervals.

The Likert scale is a widely used method for capturing and quantifying respondents' attitudes, opinions, or
perceptions towards a series of statements or questions. Developed almost a century ago, the Likert scale has
become a foundational tool in social science research, allowing researchers to measure subjective phenomena in a
structured and quantifiable manner. Understanding the nature and characteristics of the Likert scale is essential for
interpreting the data derived from it accurately and effectively.

In the context of the Likert scale, the response categories represent levels of agreement or disagreement with a given
statement or question. For example, a typical 5-point Likert scale might include the following response options:

1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neutral
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree

In this example, the response categories are ordered from the lowest level of agreement ("Strongly Disagree") to the
highest level of agreement ("Strongly Agree"), reflecting a meaningful progression or hierarchy of attitudes or
opinions.

While the Likert scale offers a structured and quantifiable approach to measuring subjective phenomena, it is
important to recognize its ordinal nature and the implications this has for data interpretation and analysis. By
understanding the characteristics and limitations of the Likert scale, researchers can adopt appropriate methods and
techniques to ensure more accurate and meaningful interpretations of Likert-scaled data.

Meaningful Order vs. Equidistant Intervals

While the response categories of the Likert scale have a meaningful order, it is important to note that they do not
necessarily represent equidistant intervals. In other words, the distance between each response category may not be
consistent or uniform across the scale. For instance, the difference in meaning between "Strongly Disagree" and
"Disagree" may not be equivalent to the difference between "Neutral" and "Agree."

This lack of equidistant intervals is a defining characteristic of ordinal scales, distinguishing them from interval or
ratio scales, which assume that the intervals between values are equal and meaningful. As a result, interpreting
Likert data using conventional arithmetic means or parametric statistical tests can be problematic, as these methods
assume interval-level measurement and equidistant intervals.

Neutral Midpoint

Another common feature of the Likert scale is the inclusion of a neutral midpoint, typically labeled as "Neutral" or
"Neither Agree nor Disagree." The neutral midpoint provides respondents with an option to indicate a lack of strong
agreement or disagreement with a given statement or question. However, it is worth noting that the interpretation of
the neutral midpoint can vary depending on the context and the specific research question. In some cases,
respondents may use the neutral midpoint as a legitimate response option, while in others, it may indicate
indifference, uncertainty, or avoidance.

Why Rounding Off Rules Matter

Interpreting the mean of Likert-scaled data using conventional arithmetic means can be misleading due to the
ordinal nature of the scale. The use of arithmetic means assumes that the response categories are equidistant, which
may not hold true for Likert data. As a result, the mean may not accurately reflect the central tendency of the data or
provide meaningful insights into respondents' attitudes or opinions.
By adopting rounding off rules, such as rounding to the nearest whole number or using mode-based rounding,
researchers can preserve the ordinal nature of the Likert scale and ensure more accurate and meaningful
interpretations. Rounding off rules help to minimize the impact of outliers and extreme responses, providing a more
robust measure of central tendency that better represents the typical respondent's experience or opinion.
By adopting rounding off rules, researchers can enhance the interpretation and analysis of Likert-scaled data by
aligning it more closely with the ordinal nature of the scale. Two commonly used rounding off rules are rounding to
the nearest whole number and mode-based rounding. Each of these approaches offers distinct benefits for preserving
the ordinal structure of Likert data and ensuring more accurate and meaningful interpretations.

Rounding to the Nearest Whole Number

Rounding to the nearest whole number is a straightforward and commonly used rounding off rule for Likert-scaled
data. This approach involves rounding the mean score to the nearest integer, which helps to simplify the data and
make it more interpretable. By rounding to the nearest whole number, researchers can maintain the ordinal nature of
the Likert scale, as the rounded scores still reflect the underlying ordinal ranking of response categories.

For example, if the calculated mean score for a set of Likert responses falls between 3.25 and 3.75, rounding to the
nearest whole number would result in a mean score of 3. This rounded score would accurately represent the central
tendency of the data while preserving the ordinal relationships between response categories ("strongly disagree" = 1,
"disagree" = 2, "neutral" = 3, "agree" = 4, "strongly agree" = 5).

Mode-Based Rounding

Mode-based rounding involves rounding the mean score to the most frequently occurring response category or
mode. This approach leverages the mode as a measure of central tendency, which can be particularly useful for
Likert data where the most common response category may provide valuable insights into respondents' attitudes or
opinions.

For instance, if the mode of a set of Likert responses is "agree" (4 on a 5-point scale), mode-based rounding would
round the mean score to 4, even if the calculated mean falls between response categories. This approach helps to
highlight the most prevalent attitude or opinion among respondents and can provide a clearer picture of the typical
respondent's experience or perspective.

Minimizing the Impact of Outliers and Extreme Responses

One of the key advantages of adopting rounding off rules for Likert-scaled data is the ability to minimize the impact
of outliers and extreme responses. Outliers and extreme responses can distort the arithmetic mean and skew
interpretations, potentially leading to misleading conclusions about the central tendency of the data.

Rounding off rules help to mitigate this issue by focusing on rounded mean scores that are less sensitive to extreme
values. By rounding the mean score to the nearest whole number or mode, researchers can create a more robust
measure of central tendency that better represents the typical respondent's experience or opinion, while minimizing
the influence of outliers and extreme responses.

In summary, adopting rounding off rules, such as rounding to the nearest whole number or using mode-based
rounding, offers several benefits for interpreting Likert-scaled data. These rounding off rules help to preserve the
ordinal nature of the Likert scale, simplify data interpretation, and create a more robust measure of central tendency
that is less sensitive to outliers and extreme responses. By implementing these rounding off rules, researchers can
ensure more accurate and meaningful interpretations of Likert data, leading to more reliable and credible research
findings.

Implications for Data Interpretation

Using rounding off rules to interpret the mean of Likert-scaled data can have significant implications for data
interpretation. By focusing on rounded mean scores, researchers can more effectively communicate the central
tendency of the data and avoid potentially misleading interpretations. Furthermore, rounding off rules can help to
highlight the distribution of responses and identify patterns or trends that may be obscured when using conventional
arithmetic means.
Statistical Analysis Considerations

In addition to data interpretation, adopting rounding off rules for Likert-scaled data can influence statistical analysis
methods and results. Traditional parametric statistical tests, such as t-tests and ANOVA, assume interval or ratio-
level data and may not be appropriate for Likert data interpreted using arithmetic means. By using rounded mean
scores and non-parametric statistical tests, researchers can ensure more accurate and valid results that align with the
ordinal nature of the Likert scale.

Research Validity and Integrity

Maintaining the validity and integrity of research findings is paramount in social science research. By adopting
rounding off rules for interpreting Likert-scaled data, researchers can enhance the validity of their findings and
ensure that they accurately reflect respondents' attitudes, opinions, and behaviors. Furthermore, adhering to rounding
off rules can help to enhance the transparency and reproducibility of research methods and results, contributing to
the overall credibility and trustworthiness of research findings.

Practical Considerations and Recommendations

While adopting rounding off rules for Likert-scaled data offers several advantages, it is essential to consider
practical implications and recommendations for researchers. First, researchers should clearly communicate their use
of rounding off rules and justify their choice of rounding method in research reports and publications. Second,
researchers should be mindful of the potential impact of rounding off rules on sample size calculations, effect size
estimation, and power analysis for future research studies.

Conclusion

The appropriate interpretation of Likert-scaled data is a critical consideration in social science research. By adopting
rounding off rules for interpreting the mean of Likert-scaled data, researchers can preserve the ordinal nature of the
scale, ensure more accurate and meaningful interpretations, and enhance the validity and integrity of their research
findings. While rounding off rules may require researchers to adjust their traditional practices and statistical analysis
methods, the benefits of adopting these rules outweigh the challenges, ultimately leading to more robust and credible
research findings. As the debate continues over the best practices for interpreting Likert-scaled data, researchers are
encouraged to embrace rounding off rules and contribute to advancing methodological rigor and transparency in
social science research.