# Scaling & Measurement

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Narender Singh RBS New Delhi Espire Campus

4

1

2

Scaling
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 qualitative instrument that associates 1011

Scaling is the branch of measurement that involves the construction of an constructs with quantitative metric units. In many ways, scaling remains one of the most hidden and misunderstood aspects of social research measurement. • And, it attempts to do one of the most difficult of research tasks -- measure abstract concepts. • Scaling describes the procedures of assigning numbers to various degrees of opinion, attitudes and other concepts. • It is applied to the procedures for attempting to determine quantitative measures of subjective abstract concepts. This can be done in two ways: 1. Making a judgment about some characteristic of an individual and then placing him directly on a scale that has been defined in terms of that characteristics, and, 2. Constructing questionnaires in such a way that a score of individual’s responses assigns him a place on a scale.

4

1

2

Types of data
• Nominal Data: when we are collecting information on a 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 or by design, can be grouped into two variable that, naturally 1011 or more categories that are mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive. The numerical symbols assigned are recognized as labels only and have no quantitative value or no order or no distance relationship. • Ordinal Data: it includes the characteristics of Nominal data plus an indicator of order. i.e. a>b>c.. • Interval data: it has the power of Ordinal Data plus it also incorporates the concept of equality of interval. • Ratio data: it includes all the powers of previous data plus the provision of absolute Zero or Origin. In research it can is used to measure money values, population counts, distances, return rates, productivity rates, etc..

4

1

2

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Characteristics of a good measurement

Tool: a measurement tool has to satisfy certain criteria; • Uni-dimensionality: the scale should measure one characteristic at a time. • Linearity: scoring system should be devised, preferably one based on interchangeable units. • Validity: This refers to the ability of a scale to measure what it is supposed to measure. • Reliability: The scale should give consistent results. • Simplicity: A scale should be as simple as possible. • Practicability: The tool should be easily administrable, contain proper instructions, and should be easily understood and conveniently arranged for easy completion.

4

1

2

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Characteristics of a good measurement

Validity: it refers to the effectiveness of an instrument in measuring the specific property that it intends to measure. The measurement of abstract properties like attitude, morale, motivation, perception, etc. • The degree of validity of an instrument is determined through the application of logic and/or statistical procedures. • Types of validity: It is concerned with different aspects of the measurement process. Each of these types uses; 1. logic, 2. statistical verification or both to determine the degree of validity, and 3. has special value under consideration

4

1

2

Characteristics of a good measurement
Content validity: The content validity of a measuring instrument is the 0011 0010 1010 1101 it provides adequate coverage of the investigative extent to which 0001 0100 1011 questions guiding the study. This is of two forms 1. Face validity is a logical type resting on investigator’s individual evaluation as to the validity of a measuring instrument. It is often a matter of opinion. 2. Sampling validity is for the representing character of the content of the instrument. The measuring instrument’s must contain a representative sample of the universe. It is also decided by a panel of judges. • • •

Predictive validity: It reflects the success of measures used for prediction or estimation. This refers to the empirically measured association between the result produced by instrument and subsequent outcomes. Construct validity: A measure is said to be possess construct validity to the degree that it confirms to predicted correlations with other propositions. Attitude scales and aptitude and personality test generally fall under this category. In order to determine the construct validity, the investigator has to find out if these relationships exists.

4

1

2

Characteristics of a good measurement
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 • Reliability: It is the degree

that a measure supplies consistent results. It is concerned with the estimates of the degree to which a measurement is free of random or unstable error. The coefficients of reliability are: 1. Stability: It is the reliability of a test or instrument inferred from examinee scores securing consistent results. 2. Equivalence: Degree to which alternatives forms of the sample measure produce error results. 3. Internal consistency: Degree to which instrument items are homogenous and reflect the same underlying constructs. • Practicality: It is defined as economy, convenience, interpretability.

4

1

2

Scale classification bases
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

The number assigning procedures or the scaling procedures may be broadly classified on one or more of the following bases: Subject orientation Response form Degree of subjectivity Scale properties Number of dimensions Scale construction techniques

4

1

2

Subject orientation
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Here, a scale may be designed to measure characteristics of the respondent who completes it or to judge the stimulus object which is presented to the respondent. • First, the stimulus is assumed to be sufficiently homogeneous so that the between-stimulus variation is small as compared to the variation among respondent. • In the latter approach, we ask the respondent to judge some specific object in terms of one or more dimensions.

4

1

2

Response form
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• Here we can classify the scales as categorical and comparative. • Categorical scales are also known as rating scales. • These scales are used when a respondent scores some object without direct reference to other objects. • Comparative scales is known as ranking scale, where the respondent is asked to compare two or more objects.

4

1

2

Degree of subjectivity • With this basis the scale data may be based on whether we measure subjective personal preferences or simply make non-preference 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 judgments. • Respondent is simply asked to judge which person is more effective in some aspect or which solution will take fewer resources without reflecting any personal preferences. Scale properties: • Considering scale properties, one may classify the scales as nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio scales. • Nominal: classify without indicating order, distance or unique origin. • Ordinal: indicate magnitude relationships of ‘more than’ or ‘less than’. • Interval: have both order and distance values • Ratio: it possess all the above features.

4

1

2

Number of dimensions:
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• Scales can be classified as unidimensional and multidimensional. • Unidimensional measures only one attribute of the respondent or object, • whereas multidimensional scaling recognizes that an object might be described better by using the concept of an attribute space of ‘n’ dimension.

4

1

2

Scale construction techniques
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• Arbitrary/ adoc approach: Here scale is prepared on ad-hoc basis. It is presumed that such scale measures the concepts for which they have been designed. • Evaluation /Consensus approach: A panel of judges evaluate the items chosen for inclusion in the instrument in terms of whether they are relevant to the topic area and unambiguous in implication. • Item analysis approach: Individual items are developed into a test which is given to a group of respondents. After the test, the total scores are calculated for every one. Then individual items are analyzed to determine which items are responsible for variation of highest score and lowest score. • Cumulative approach: This is chosen on the basis of their conforming to some ranking of items with ascending and descending discriminating power. • Factor scales: It may be constructed on the basis of inter-correlation of items which indicate that a common factor accounts for the relationship between items.

4

1

2

Different scales
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

1. 2. 3. 4.

Arbitrary approach Consensus scale approach Item analysis approach Cumulative scale approach 5. Factor analysis approach

• Arbitrary scales • Differential scales

• Likert scales • Gutman’s scalogram

• Osgood’s semantic differential scale, multidimension scaling.

4

1

2

Arbitrary scales
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• •

Developed on ad-hoc basis. Deigned by researchers own subjective selection of items.

Process: 1. 2. 3.

Researchers collects few statements or items which they believes are unambiguous and appropriate for a given topic. Some of these are selected for inclusion in the measuring instrument ,and Then people are asked to check in the list on which they agree.

Here researcher has to rely mostly on his intution and competence.

4

1

2

Thurstone-type scales
L.L.thrustone was associated with differential scales which have been developed using consensus scale 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 approach. Selection of items is by a panel of judges who evaluate the items in terms of whether they are relevant to topic and unambiguous in implication. Procedure: Researcher gather a large number of statements, usually more than 20. 1. These statement are submitted to a panel of judges, each of whom arranges them in groups or piles ranging from one extreme to another. Generally the number of piles is eleven. 2. Each judge yields a composite position for each of the items. In case of disagreement among judges on particular item, it is discarded. 3. Items retained are given value from 1 to 11 as per group. 4. Final selection of statements in then made by selecting a sample of statement scores which are evenly spread from one to another. The statement so selected will be the final scale for respondent. •

After the scale is developed, respondents are asked to check the statement with which they agree. The median value of statement that they check is worked out and quantify their opinion.

4

1

2

Likert-type scales
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• •

• • • • • • •

It is based on summated scales / item analysis approach, where a particular item is evaluated on the basis of how well it discriminates between those person whose total score is high and whose is low. Thus it consist of number of statements which express either favorable or unfavorable attitude towards a given object to which the respondent is asked to react. Each response in given a numerical value, indicating the favorableness and unfavourableness, the scores are totaled to measure the respondent’s attitude. Procedure: The researcher collects a large number of statement which are relevant to attitude being studied. A trial test is administered to the number of subjects. The response of various statement are scored . The total score of the respondent is obtained by adding his scores that he received for separate statement. The statement is found out which have high discriminatory power. Only those statement which consistently correlate with total test is retained in the final instrument and others are discarded.

4

1

2

Guttman’s scalogram
0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• Constructed by Louis Guttman. • Like other scales , it also consists of series of statement to which a respondent expresses his agreement or disagreement. • The special feature is to form a cumulative series.

4

1

2

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• The purpose of Guttman’s scaling is to establish a onedimensional continuum for a concept you wish to measure. • Essentially, we would like a set of items or statements so that a respondent who agrees with any specific question in the list will also agree with all previous questions. • Put more formally, we would like to be able to predict item responses perfectly knowing only the total score for the respondent. • For example, imagine a ten-item cumulative scale. If the respondent scores a four, it should mean that he/she agreed with the first four statements. • If the respondent scores an eight, it should mean they agreed with the first eight.

4

1

2

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• Develop the Items. • You would develop a large set of items that reflect the concept. You would want to be sure to specify in your definition whether you are talking about any type of immigration (legal and illegal) from anywhere (Europe, Asia, Latin and South America, Africa). Let's say you came up with the following statements: • • • • • • • I would permit a child of mine to marry an immigrant. I believe that this country should allow more immigrants in. I would be comfortable if a new immigrant moved next door to me. I would be comfortable with new immigrants moving into my community. It would be fine with me if new immigrants moved onto my block. I would be comfortable if my child dated a new immigrant. Of course, we would want to come up with many more statements

4

1

2

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• Rate the Items. • Next, we would want to have a group of judges rate the statements or items in terms of how favorable they are to the concept of immigration. • They would give a Yes if the item was favorable toward immigration and a No if it is not. • Notice that we are not asking the judges whether they personally agree with the statement. Instead, we're asking them to make a judgment about how the statement is related to the construct of interest.

4

1

2

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

• • • • • •

Develop the Cumulative Scale. The key to Guttman’s scaling is in the analysis. We construct a matrix or table that shows the responses of all the respondents on all of the items. We then sort this matrix so that respondents who agree with more statements are listed at the top and those agreeing with fewer are at the bottom. For respondents with the same number of agreements, we sort the statements from left to right from those that most agreed to those that fewest agreed to. We might get a table. Each scale item has a scale value associated with it (obtained from the scalogram analysis). To compute a respondent's scale score we simply sum the scale values of every item they agree with.

4

1

2