SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2022 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2

How many response categories are sufficient for Likert type scales? An empirical study based on the Item Response Theory

Eren Can AYBEK
Cetin TORAMAN
Pages
534–547
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Therefore, based on the findings of the study, researchers are recommended to use a 5-point response category in their scale development process.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The current study investigates the optimum number of response categories for the Likert type of scales under the item response theory (IRT).
📊
Key Findings & Data:A form of the “Social Gender Equity Scale” developed by Gozutok et al. (2017) was prepared, which had 3, 5 and 7-point response categories.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore, based on the findings of the study, researchers are recommended to use a 5-point response category in their scale development process.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Likert-type scale · Response categories · Item response theory

Abstract

The current study investigates the optimum number of response categories for the Likert type of scales under the item response theory (IRT). The data was collected from university students attend to mainly the faculty of medicine and the faculty of education. A form of the “Social Gender Equity Scale” developed by Gozutok et al. (2017) was prepared, which had 3, 5 and 7-point response categories. The graded response model (GRM) was used for item calibrations. The results of the study have revealed that using a 5-point response option provides advantages over using a 3-point response category in terms of reliability and test information perspective in the scale development process. The-5 point scale also provides easier responding process for the respondents while it does not pose a major disadvantage compared to a 7-point response category in the terms of reliability. Therefore, based on the findings of the study, researchers are recommended to use a 5-point response category in their scale development process.

Özet

The current study investigates the optimum number of response categories for the Likert type of scales under the item response theory (IRT). The data was collected from university students attend to mainly the faculty of medicine and the faculty of education. A form of the “Social Gender Equity Scale” developed by Gozutok et al. (2017) was prepared, which had 3, 5 and 7-point response categories. The graded response model (GRM) was used for item calibrations. The results of the study have revealed that using a 5-point response option provides advantages over using a 3-point response category in terms of reliability and test information perspective in the scale development process. The-5 point scale also provides easier responding process for the respondents while it does not pose a major disadvantage compared to a 7-point response category in the terms of reliability. Therefore, based on the findings of the study, researchers are recommended to use a 5-point response category in their scale development process.

🔖

Cite This Article

AYBEK, E. C., TORAMAN, C. (2022). How many response categories are sufficient for Likert type scales? An empirical study based on the Item Response Theory. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2, 534–547. https://ajindex.com/articles/540021

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Adelson, J.L., & McCoach, D.B. (2010). Measuring the mathematical attitudes of elementary students: The effects of a 4-point or 5-point Likert-Type scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(5) 796-807. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164410366694
  2. Aiken, L.R. (1983). Number of response categories and statistics on a teacher rating scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 397-401.
  3. Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing. The USA: Prentice-Hall International, Inc. Bora, B. (2013). Pazarlama araştırmalarında kullanılan likert türü ölçeklerin uygulanabilirliğinin incelenmesi [A Study on The Applicability of The Likert Type Scales in Marketing] [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Sakarya University. Chalmers, R.P. (2012). mirt: A Multidimensional Item Response Theory Package for the R Environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1 29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06
  4. Champney, H., & Marshall, H. (1939). Optimal refinement of the rating scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 23, 323-331.
  5. Chang, L. (1994). A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18(3), 205-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169401800302
  6. Dawes, J. (2008). Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International Journal of Market Research, 50(1), 61-104. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530805000106
  7. DeVellis, R.F. (2003). Scale development, theory and applications. SAGE Publications. Dunn-Rankin, P., Knezek, G.A., Wallace, S., & Zhang, S. (2004). Scaling methods. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Gozutok, F.D., Toraman, C. ve Acar Erdol, T. (2017). Toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği ölçeğinin (TCEÖ) geliştirilmesi [Development of gender equality scale]. İlköğretim Online Dergisi (Elementary Education Online), 16(3), 1036 1048. http://dx.doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2017.330240
  8. Jamieson, S. (2004). Likert Scales: How to (Ab)use them. Medical Education, 38, 1217‐1218. Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D.K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology (BJAST), 7(4), 396-403. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975
  9. Leung, S.O. (2011). A comparison of psychometric properties and normality in 4-, 5-, 6-, and 11-point Likert Scales. Journal of Social Service Research, 37, 412-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2011.58