Abstract:How people make choices among alternatives are of interest in different areas of psychological research. One paradigm to answer this question is by applying Likert Scale (LS) to compare the agreements to different alternatives, and the respective LS scores are then transferred into rank order of preference. However, using LS to infer choices is somewhat debatable because the measurement format of LS was not designed for revealing psychological preference. In this article, we examined to what extent it is appropriate to use quantitative indicators derived from LS to infer choices, with which we used the Comparative Judgment (CJ) procedure to represent a direct measurement of choice decision to compare. A total of 929 adolescents reported their effort and ability attributions for academic failure and success using both LS and CJ. We found that while using LS is generally accurate in predicting results obtained via CJ, the percentage of people revealing different choices inferred from LS versus CJ was 14.7% and 12.1% for the success and failure scenarios, respectively, suggesting that inferring psychological preference from LS is not without risk, at least for this sample of adolescents from a culturally-Chinese society. Furthermore, the majority of participants displaying incongruent decisions of achievement attribution via LS and CJ showed equivalent LS scores between effort and ability attributions. A goodness-of-fit test was conducted (on a model motivated by the beta-binomial distribution) and successfully eliminated the possibility that the tied LS scores in effort and ability attributions actually represent participants’ true psychological state.

The Likert Scale Revisited

Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert-scale items? Effects of testing time and scale properties.

The Neutral Point on a Likert Scale

Likert Scale in Social Sciences Research: Problems and Difficulties

Improved Properties of the Big Five Inventory and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in the Expanded Format Relative to the Likert Format

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

Can Likert scales predict choices? Testing the congruence between using Likert scale and comparative judgment on measuring attribution

Number of Response Options, Reliability, Validity, and Potential Bias in the Use of the Likert Scale Education and Social Science Research: A Literature Review

The Effect of Rating Scale Design on Extreme Response Tendency in Consumer Product Ratings

Designing, Constructing, and Analyzing Likert Scale Data

Evidence-Based Survey Design: The Use of a Midpoint on the Likert Scale

Cultural differences in responses to a likert scale

The Effects of Questionnaire Length on the Relative Impact of Response Styles in Ambulatory Assessment

A novel Likert scale based on fuzzy sets theory

Differences in Effects of Honesty Measurement Methods: Situational Judgment Test Format vs. Likert-type Rating Scale

Reporting and Interpreting Scores Derived from Likert-type Scales

Can Likert Scales be Treated as Interval Scales?—A Simulation Study

Single-Item Versus Multiple-Item Measurement Scales: An Empirical Comparison

Scaling preferences using probabilistic choice models: is there a ratio-scale representation of subjective liking?