MEASUREMENT and scaling

techniques

PRATISHTHA VERMA
L-2017-HSc-349-M
 INTRODUCTION

Measurement means assigning numbers or other symbols to characteristics of

objects according to certain pre-specified rules.
• One-to-one correspondence between the numbers and the characteristics being
measured.
• The rules for assigning numbers should be standardized and applied uniformly.
• Rules must not change over objects or time.
Measurement is a process of mapping aspects of a domain onto other aspects of a
range according to some rule of correspondence.
Scaling involves creating a continuum upon which measured objects are located.
 SCALE CHARACTERISTICS

Scale basically deals with providing four types of information about the
subject being measured. These components are :
• Description (unique label or descriptors)
• Order (relative position or size of descriptors)
• Distance (absolute difference between descriptors)
• Origin (true zero point in a scale)
 TYPES OF MEASUREMENT SCALES

Scales of measurement can be considered in terms of their mathematical

properties. The most widely used classification of measurement scales are:
(a) nominal scale (marks assigned in a test)
(b) ordinal scale (rank order of race winners)
(c) interval scale (performance rating of employees on scale of 0-10)
(d) ratio scale (time to finish a task in seconds)
 NOMINAL SCALE

• Nominal data are numerical in name only, because they do not share any of the
properties of the numbers we deal in ordinary arithmetic.
• The numbers serve only as labels or tags for identifying and classifying objects.
• When used for identification, there is a strict one-to-one correspondence between
the numbers and the objects.
• The numbers do not reflect the amount of the characteristic possessed by the
objects.
• The only permissible operation on the numbers in a nominal scale is counting.
• Only a limited number of statistics, all of which are based on frequency counts, are
permissible, e.g., percentages, and mode.
 ORDINAL SCALE

• A ranking scale in which numbers are assigned to objects to indicate the

relative extent to which the objects possess some characteristics.
• Can determine whether an object has more or less of a characteristic than
some other object, but not how much more or less.
• Any series of numbers can be assigned that preserves the ordered
relationships between the objects.
• In addition to the counting operation allowable for nominal scale data,
ordinal scales permit the use of statistics based on centiles, e.g., percentile,
quartile, median.
 RATIO SCALE

• Possesses all the properties of the nominal, ordinal, and interval scales.
• It has an absolute zero point.
• It is meaningful to compute ratios of scale values.
• Only proportionate transformations of the form y = bx, where b is a
positive constant, are allowed.
• All statistical techniques can be applied to ratio data.
 INTERVAL SCALE

• Numerically equal distances on the scale represent equal values in the characteristic being
measured.
• It permits comparison of the differences between objects.
• The location of the zero point is not fixed. Both the zero point and the units of
measurement are arbitrary.
• Any positive linear transformation of the form y = a + bx will preserve the properties of the
scale.
• It is meaningful to take ratios of scale values.
• Statistical techniques that may be used include all of those that can be applied to nominal
and ordinal data, and in addition the arithmetic mean, standard deviation, and other
statistics commonly used in marketing research.
 SOURCES OF ERRORS

Measurement should be precise and unambiguous in an ideal research study. The researcher
must be aware about the sources of error in measurement. The following are the possible
sources of error in measurement.

(a)Respondent: At times the respondent may be reluctant to express strong negative feelings
or it is just possible that he may have very little knowledge but may not admit his ignorance.
Transient factors like fatigue, boredom, anxiety, etc. may limit the ability of the respondent to
respond accurately and fully.

(b)Situation: Any condition which places a strain on interview can have serious effects on the
interviewer-respondent rapport. For instance, if someone else is present, he can distort
responses by joining in or merely by being present.
 SOURCES OF ERORS

(c)Measurer: The interviewer can distort responses by rewording or reordering questions.

His behaviour, style and looks may encourage or discourage certain replies from
respondents. Careless mechanical processing may distort the findings. Errors may also creep
in because of incorrect coding, faulty tabulation and/or statistical calculations, particularly
in the data-analysis stage.

(d)Instrument: Error may arise because of the defective measuring instrument. The use of
complex words, beyond the comprehension of the respondent, ambiguous meanings, poor
printing, inadequate space for replies, response choice omissions, etc. are a few things that
make the measuring instrument defective and may result in measurement errors. Another
type of instrument deficiency is the poor sampling of the universe of items of concern.
 TESTS OF SOUND MEASUREMENT

• Sound measurement must meet the tests of validity, reliability and practicality.
• Validity refers to the extent to which a test measures what we actually wish to measure.
Validity is of two kinds; internal and external.
• External validity of research findings is their generalizability to populations, settings,
treatment variables and measurement variables. The internal validity of a research
design is its ability to measure what it aims to measure.
• Reliability has to do with the accuracy and precision of a measurement procedure.
• Practicality is concerned with a wide range of factors of economy, convenience, and
interpretability.
 TEST OF VALIDITY

• Validity is the most critical criterion and indicates the degree to which an instrument
measures what it is supposed to measure.
• Validity can also be thought of as utility.
• Validity is the extent to which differences found with a measuring instrument reflect
true differences among those being tested.
• Relevance of evidence often depends upon the nature of the research problem and the
judgment of the researcher.
• Three types of validity are taken into account for research -
Content validity, Criterion-related validity and Construct validity.
 TYPES OF VALIDITY

• Content validity : The extent to which a measuring instrument provides adequate coverage of
the topic under study. If the instrument contains a representative sample of the universe, the
content validity is good. Its determination is primarily judgmental and intuitive.
• Criterion-related validity : Ability to predict some outcome or estimate the existence of some
current condition. This form of validity reflects the success of measures used for some empirical
estimating purpose. The concerned criterion must possess the following qualities:
a) Relevance: (A criterion is relevant if it is defined in terms we judge to be the proper
measure.)
b) Freedom from bias: (Freedom from bias is attained when the criterion gives each subject an
equal opportunity to score well.)
c) Reliability: (A reliable criterion is stable or reproducible.)
d) Availability: (The information specified by the criterion must be available.)
 TYPES OF VALIDITY

Construct validity : A measure is said to possess construct validity to the degree

that it confirms to predicted correlations with other theoretical propositions.
It is the most complex and abstract.
• Construct validity is the degree to which scores on a test can be accounted for
by the explanatory constructs of a sound theory. For determining construct
validity, we associate a set of other propositions with the results received from
using our measurement instrument.
• If measurements on our devised scale correlate in a predicted way with these
other propositions, we can conclude that there is some construct validity.
 TEST OF RELIABILITY

• The test of reliability is another important test of sound measurement. A measuring

instrument is reliable if it provides consistent results.
• Reliable measuring instrument does contribute to validity, but a reliable instrument
need not be a valid instrument. For instance, a scale that consistently overweighs
objects by five kgs., is a reliable scale, but it does not give a valid measure of weight. But
the other way is not true i.e., a valid instrument is always reliable.
• Reliability is not as valuable as validity, but it is easier to assess reliability in comparison
to validity. If the quality of reliability is satisfied by an instrument, then while using it
we can be confident that the transient and situational factors are not interfering.
 Contd..

• Two aspects of reliability viz., stability and equivalence deserve special

mention.
• The stability aspect is concerned with securing consistent results with
repeated measurements of the same person and with the same
instrument. We usually determine the degree of stability by comparing
the results of repeated measurements.
• The equivalence aspect considers how much error may get introduced
by different investigators or different samples of the items being
studied. A good way to test for the equivalence of measurements by two
investigators is to compare their observations of the same events.
 IMPROVING RELIABILITY

Reliability can be improved in the following two ways:

(i) By standardizing the conditions under which the measurement takes
place i.e., we must ensure that external sources of variation such as
boredom, fatigue, etc., are minimized to the extent possible. That will
improve stability aspect.
(ii) By carefully designed directions for measurement with no variation
from group to group, by using trained and motivated persons to conduct
the research and also by broadening the sample of items used. This will
improve equivalence aspect.
 TEST OF PRACTICALITY

The practicality characteristic of a measuring instrument can be judged in terms of

economy, convenience and interpretability. From the operational point of view, the
measuring instrument ought to be practical i.e., it should be economical, convenient
and interpretable.
• Economy consideration suggests that some trade-off is needed between the ideal
research project and that which the budget can afford.
• Convenience test suggests that the measuring instrument should be easy to
administer. For this purpose one should give due attention to the proper layout of the
measuring instrument.
• Interpretability consideration is specially important when persons other than the
designers of the test are to interpret the results.
 DEVELOPING MEASUREMENT TOOLS

The technique of developing measurement tools involves a four-stage

process, consisting of the
following:
(a) Concept development (understanding and defining concepts of study)
(b) Specification of concept dimensions (specifying what to study and how)
(c) Selection of indicators (develop questions, scales and other devices)
(d) Formation of index (summarize the study and define a common index)
 SCALING

Scaling describes the procedures of assigning numbers to various degrees

of opinion, attitude and other concepts. This can be done in two ways –
(i) making a judgement about some characteristic of an individual and
then placing him directly on a scale that has been defined in terms of that
characteristic.
(ii) constructing questionnaires in such a way that the score of individual’s
responses assigns him a place on a scale.
 BASIS FOR SCALING

The number assigning procedures or the scaling procedures may be

broadly classified on one or more of the following bases:
a) subject orientation;
b) response form;
c) degree of subjectivity;
d) scale properties;
e) number of dimensions and
f) scale construction techniques
 SCALING TECHNIQUES

Scaling Techniques

Rating scales Ranking scales

The Method of
The graphic paired Method of
rating scale itemized comparison rank order
rating scale s
 RATING SCALES

• The rating scale involves qualitative description of a limited number of aspects of a thing or
of traits of a person.
• Rating scales (or categorical scales), we judge an object in absolute terms against some
specified criteria, properties of objects without reference to other similar objects.
• These ratings may be in such forms as “like-dislike”, “above average, average, below average”,
or “excellent—good—average—below, average—poor” and so on. These are two types:
i. The graphic rating scale is quite simple and is commonly used in practice. Under it the
various points are usually put along the line to form a continuum and the rater indicates
his rating by simply making a mark (such as ü) at the appropriate point on a line that
runs from one extreme to the other.
ii. The itemized rating scale (also known as numerical scale) presents a series of
statements from which a respondent selects one as best reflecting his evaluation.
 RANKING SCALES

Ranking scales (or comparative scales),we make relative judgements against other similar objects.
The respondents under this method directly compare two or more objects and make choices among
them. There are two generally used approaches of ranking scales:
(a) Method of paired comparisons: The respondent can express his attitude by making a choice
between two objects, say between a new flavour of soft drink and an established brand of drink. But
when more than two stimuli to judge, the number of judgements required in a paired comparison is
given by the formula:
N=n(n-1)/2, where N = number of judgements and n = number of stimuli or objects to be
judged
(b) Method of rank order: Under this method the respondents are asked to rank their choices.
This method is easier and faster than the method of paired comparisons stated above. For example,
with 10 items it takes 45 pair comparisons to complete the task, whereas the method of rank order
simply requires ranking of 10 items only.
 DIFFERENT SCALES FOR MEASURING
ATTITUDES OF PEOPLE

Name of the scale construction approach Name of the scale developed

1.Arbitrary approach Arbitrary scales

2.Consensus scale approach Differential scales (such as Thurstone

Differential scale)
3.Item analysis approach Summated scales (such as Likert Scale)

4.Cumulative scale approach Cumulative scales (such as Guttman’s Scalogram)

5.Factor analysis approach Factor scales (such as Osgood’s Semantic

Differential, Multi-dimensional Scaling, etc.)
 SCALE CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES

(i) Arbitrary approach: It is an approach where scale is developed on ad hoc basis. This is
the most widely used approach. It is presumed that such scales measure the concepts for
which they have been designed, although there is little evidence to support such an
assumption.
(ii) Consensus approach: Here 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.
(iii) Item analysis approach: Under it a number of individual items are developed into a
test which is given to a group of respondents. After administering the test, the total scores
are calculated for every one. Individual items are then analyzed to determine which items
discriminate between persons or objects with high total scores and those with low scores.
 Contd..

(iv) Cumulative scales are chosen on the basis of their conforming to

some ranking of items with ascending and descending discriminating
power. For instance, in such a scale the endorsement of an item
representing an extreme position should also result in the endorsement of
all items indicating a less extreme position.
(v) Factor scales may be constructed on the basis of inter correlations of
items which indicate that a common factor accounts for the relationship
between items. This relationship is typically measured through factor
analysis method.
Thank You