A Review of Key Likert Scale Development Advances: 1995–2019

Developing self-report Likert scales is an essential part of modern psychology. However, it is hard for psychologists to remain apprised of best practices as methodological developments accumulate. To address this, this current paper offers a selective review of advances in Likert scale development...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Frontiers in psychology Vol. 12; p. 637547
Main Authors: Jebb, Andrew T., Ng, Vincent, Tay, Louis
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Switzerland Frontiers Media S.A 04.05.2021
Subjects:
ISSN:1664-1078, 1664-1078
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Developing self-report Likert scales is an essential part of modern psychology. However, it is hard for psychologists to remain apprised of best practices as methodological developments accumulate. To address this, this current paper offers a selective review of advances in Likert scale development that have occurred over the past 25 years. We reviewed six major measurement journals (e.g., Psychological Methods , Educational , and Psychological Measurement ) between the years 1995–2019 and identified key advances, ultimately including 40 papers and offering written summaries of each. We supplemented this review with an in-depth discussion of five particular advances: (1) conceptions of construct validity, (2) creating better construct definitions, (3) readability tests for generating items, (4) alternative measures of precision [e.g., coefficient omega and item response theory (IRT) information], and (5) ant colony optimization (ACO) for creating short forms. The Supplementary Material provides further technical details on these advances and offers guidance on software implementation. This paper is intended to be a resource for psychological researchers to be informed about more recent psychometric progress in Likert scale creation.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
Reviewed by: Gabriela Gonçalves, University of Algarve, Portugal; Burak Buldur, Cumhuriyet University, Turkey
This article was submitted to Quantitative Psychology and Measurement, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
Edited by: Sai-fu Fung, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
ISSN:1664-1078
1664-1078
DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.637547