Figure 10.

1 Relationship of Noncomparative
Scaling to the Previous Chapters and the
Marketing Research Process
Focus of This Relationship to Relationship to Marketing
Chapter Previous Chapters Research Process
• Continuous Rating • Research Design Problem Definition
Scales Components
(Chapter 3)
• Itemized Rating Approach to Problem
Scales • Basic Types of
Scales (Chapter 9) Research Design

Field Work

Data Preparation and

Analysis

Report Preparation
and Presentation
Figure 10.2 Non Comparative Scaling Techniques: An Overview

Opening Vignette
Noncomparative Scaling Techniques
Internet Applications

Focus on Elrick & Lavidge

Fig 10.3 Table 10.1
Continuous Rating Scales

Itemized Rating Scales

Likert Stapel Semantic Differential

Rating Scale Decisions
Figs 10.4 and 10.5 Table 10.2
Scale Evaluation
Fig 10.6
Choosing a Scaling Technique

Application to Contemporary
Issues
Internationa Technolog
TQM Ethics
l y
Figure 10.3 A Classification of Noncomparative Rating Scales

Noncomparative
Rating Scales

Continuous Itemized
Rating Scales Rating Scales

Semantic
Stapel Likert
Differential
Figure 10.4 Balanced and Unbalanced Scales

Balanced Scale Unbalanced Scale

Surfing the Internet is Surfing the Internet is
____ Extremely Good ____ Extremely Good
____ Very Good ____ Very Good
____ Good ____ Good
____ Bad ____ Somewhat Good
____ Very Bad ____ Bad
____ Extremely Bad ____ Very Bad
Figure 10.5 Rating Scale Configurations

A variety of scale configurations may be employed to measure the comfort of Nike

shoes. Some examples include:
Nike shoes are:
1) Place an “X” on one of the blank spaces…
Very Very
Uncomfortable Comfortable

2)Circle the number…

Very 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Very
Uncomfortable Comfortable

3)Place an “X” on one of the blank spaces…

Very Uncomfortable

Neither Uncomfortable nor Comfortable

Comfortable
 Figure 10.5 Rating Scale Configurations (continued)

4)

Very Uncomfortable Somewhat Somewhat Comfortable Very

Uncomfortable Neither
Uncomfortable Comfortable Comfortable
Comfortable nor
Uncomfortable

5)
-3 -2 -1 0 1
2
Very
3 Neither
Comfortable Very
uncomfortabl
e nor Comfortable
Uncomfortable
 Figure 10.6 Scale Evaluation
Scale
Evaluation
Validity
Reliability

Content
Test-Retest
Internal Criterion
Consistency
Alternative
Forms Construct
Convergent
Validity
Discriminant
Validity Nomological
Validity
T A B L E 1 0 .1 B a s ic N o n c o m p a ra tive S c a le s

S c a le B a s ic C h a ra c te ris tic s E x a m p le s A d va n ta g e s D is a d va n ta g e s

C o n tin u o u s P lac e a m a rk o n a R e a c tio n to T V E a s y to c o n s tru c t S co rin g c a n b e

R a tin g S c a le c o n tin u o u s lin e co m m e rcia ls c u m b e rs o m e
u n le s s c o m p u teriz e d

Ite m ize d
R a tin g S c a le s

L ik e rt S ca le D e g re e o f a g re e m e n t o nM ae a su re m e n t o f E a s y to c o n s tru c t, M o re tim e
1 (stro n g ly d is a g ree ) to a ttitu d e s a d m in is te r, a n d c o n s u m in g
5 (stro n g ly a g re e ) s c a le u n d e rs ta n d

S e m a n tic S e ve n-p o in t sc a le w ith B ra n d , p ro d u c t, a n dV e rs a tile D iffic ult to c o n stru ct

D iffe re n tia l b ip o la r la b e ls co m p a n y im a g e s a p p ro p ria te b ip o la r
a d je c tive s

S ta p e l S c a le U n ip o la r te-pno in t sc a le , M e a su re m e n t o f E a s y to c o n s tru c t Co n fu s in g a n d
-5 to + 5 , w itho u t a n e u tra a ttitu
l des and A d m in is te re d o ve r d iffic ult to
p o in t (z e ro ) im a g e s te lep h o n e a p p ly
 TABLE 10.2
Summary of Itemized Rating Scale Decisions

1. Number of categories While there is no single, optimal number, traditional guidelines

suggest that there should be between five and nine categories.

2. Balanced vs. unbalanced In general, the scale should be balanced to obtain objective data.

3. Odd or even number of If a neutral or indifferent scale response is possible for

categories at least some of the respondents, an odd number of categories

should be used.
 TABLE 10.2 (Cont.)
Summary of Itemized Rating Scale Decisions

4. Forced versus nonforced In situations where the respondents are expected

to have no opinion, the accuracy of data may be

improved by a nonforced scale.

5. Verbal description An argument can be made for labeling all or many

scale categories. The category descriptions should

be located as close to the response categories as

possible.

6. Physical form A number of options should be tried and the best

one selected.