Department of Psychology, York University.
Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia.
Psychol Methods. 2024 Jun;29(3):606-612. doi: 10.1037/met0000631.
Wilson et al. (2022) compared the Likert response format to an alternative format, which they called the Guttman response format. Using a Rasch modeling approach, they found that the Guttman response format had better properties relative to the Likert response format. We agree with their analyses and conclusions. However, they have failed to mention many existing articles that have sought to overcome the disadvantages of the Likert format through the use of an alternative format. For example, the so-called "Guttman response format" is essentially the same as the Expanded format, which was proposed by Zhang and Savalei (2016) as a way to overcome the disadvantages of the Likert format. Similar alternative formats have been investigated since the 1960s. In this short response article, we provide a review of several alternative formats, explaining in detail the key characteristics of all the alternative formats that are designed to overcome the problems with the Likert format. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
威尔逊等人(2022 年)比较了李克特反应格式和他们称之为古特曼反应格式的另一种格式。他们使用拉什建模方法发现,古特曼反应格式相对于李克特反应格式具有更好的特性。我们同意他们的分析和结论。但是,他们没有提到许多现有的文章,这些文章试图通过使用替代格式来克服李克特格式的缺点。例如,所谓的“古特曼反应格式”本质上与张和萨瓦莱(2016 年)提出的扩展格式相同,这是一种克服李克特格式缺点的方法。自 20 世纪 60 年代以来,一直在研究类似的替代格式。在这篇简短的回应文章中,我们对几种替代格式进行了回顾,详细解释了旨在克服李克特格式问题的所有替代格式的关键特征。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2024 APA,保留所有权利)。