CHAPTER 10 MEASUREMENT AND SCALING: NONCOMPARATIVE SCALING TECHNIQUES OPENING QUESTIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

How are noncomparative scaling techniques different from comparative scaling, and what is the distinction between continuous and itemized rating scales? What are the differences between Likert, semantic differential, and Stapel scales? What are the decisions involved in constructing itemized rating scales, and what options should be considered? How are scales evaluated, and what is the relationship between reliability and validity? In what way can noncomparative scaling contribute to total quality management? What considerations are important in implementing noncomparative scales in an international setting? How does technology affect noncomparative scaling? What ethical issues are involved in developing noncomparative scales? How can the Internet be used to construct noncomparative scales?

AUTHOR'S NOTES: CHAPTER FOCUS This chapter provides a discussion of the noncomparative scales. Continuous and itemized rating scales are discussed. The important noncomparative itemized rating scale decisions are examined and guidelines provided. The construction of multi-item scales is described. The evaluation of scales in terms of measurement accuracy, reliability, validity, and generalizability is discussed at some length. The discussion of scaling techniques is much more extensive as compared to competing texts. Examples, including instructions for administering these scales, have been provided to illustrate the various scales. This chapter could be taught by focusing on the opening questions sequentially. Greater emphasis could be placed on continuous and itemized rating scales (Opening Question 1), Likert, semantic differential, and Stapel scales (Opening Question 2), noncomparative itemized rating scale decisions (Opening Question 3) and scale evaluation (Opening Question 4). Ethical issues in developing noncomparative scales (Opening Question 8) also deserve special attention. OUTLINE 1. 2. 3. Overview Noncomparative Scaling Techniques i. Continuous Rating Scale Itemized Rating Scales i. Likert Scale ii. Semantic Differential Scale iii. Stapel Scale Noncomparative Itemized Rating Scale Decisions i. Number of Scale Categories ii. Balanced Versus Unbalanced Scales 128

4.

5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

iii. Odd or Even Number of Categories iv. Forced or Nonforced Choice v. Nature and Degree of Verbal Description vi. Physical Form or Configuration Multi-item Scales Scale Evaluation i. Reliability ii. Test-Retest Reliability iii. Alternative-Forms Reliability iv. Internal Consistency Reliability v. Validity a. Content Validity b. Criterion Validity c. Construct Validity vi. Relationship Between Reliability and Validity Choosing a Scaling Technique Summary Illustration Using the Opening Vignette International Marketing Research Technology and Marketing Research Ethics in Marketing Research Summary Key Terms and Concepts Acronyms

TEACHING SUGGESTIONS Opening Question 1 * Describe the different noncomparative scaling techniques. If available, bring examples of the different scales to class to show to the students. Begin by defining noncomparative scaling as the type of scaling which does not compare the object against another object or some standard. Rather, the rater uses whatever standard seems most appropriate to him or her. 1. Continuous rating scale: the respondents rate the objects by placing a mark at the appropriate position on a line that runs from one extreme of the criterion variable to the other. The form of the continuous scale varies considerably depending on the imagination of the researcher. Their use in marketing has been limited because they are not as reliable as itemized scales, the scoring process is cumbersome, and they provide little additional information. 2. Itemized rating scale: the respondents are provided with scales having numbers and/or brief descriptions associated with each category. The respondents are required to select one of the specified categories that best describes the object being rated. Opening Question 2 * Discuss the various types of itemized rating scales. 129

Likert scale: the respondents are required to indicate a degree of agreement or disagreement with each of a series of statements related to the stimulus objects. The Likert scale is often used in marketing. It is easy to construct and administer, it is easy for respondents to complete, and it is suitable for mail, telephone, and personal surveys. Semantic differential scale: is a seven-point rating scale with end points associated with bipolar labels that have semantic meaning. Respondents are required to rate objects on a number of itemized, seven-point rating scales bounded at each end by one of two bipolar adjectives. This scale is popular in marketing and has been used in image studies, promotion strategy, and new product development studies. Staple scale: is a unipolar rating scale with ten categories numbered from -5 to +5, without a neutral point. Respondents are asked to indicate how accurately or inaccurately each term describes the object by selecting an appropriate numerical response category. Though easier to construct than the Semantic Differential, while giving the same results, the Staple scale has not been widely applied in marketing. Opening Question 3 * Highlight the major decisions involved in constructing itemized rating scales. Use a running example like the Department Store Patronage Project to aid in student understanding. 1. Number of scale categories to use: the number of categories should be between five and nine; however, there is no single, optimal number of categories, which would be applicable for all scaling situations. 2. Balanced versus unbalanced scale: a balanced scale has an equal number of favorable and unfavorable categories used; otherwise, the scale is unbalanced. The scale should be balanced in order to obtain objective data; however, if the distribution of responses is likely to be skewed, an unbalanced scale with more categories in the direction of skewness may be appropriate. Use Figure 10.4. Have the students discuss any potential skewness in the responses. 3. Odd or even number of categories: with an odd number of categories, the middle scale position is generally designated as neutral. If a neutral or indifferent scale response is a possibility for at least some of the respondents, an odd number of categories should be used. Students can debate the effect of a neutral category on the data obtained. 4. Forced versus non-forced scales: a forced rating scale does not have a "no opinion" or "no knowledge" option. Thus, the respondents without an opinion may mark the middle scale position. If a sufficient proportion of the respondents in fact do not have an opinion on the topic, marking the middle position in this manner will distort measures of central tendency and variance. In situations where the respondents are expected to have no opinion, the accuracy of the data may be improved by having a nonforced rating scale, which includes a "no opinion" or "no knowledge" category. Students should discuss the appropriateness of a forced/nonforced rating scale. 5. Nature and degree of verbal description: the strength of the adjectives used to anchor the scale has a slight tendency to influence the distribution of the responses. With strong anchors, respondents are less likely to use the extreme scale categories. Have the students reach consensus on the scale anchors. Try to encourage multiple anchors, which can be used in the survey. 6. Physical form of the scale: there is no agreement as to which form is the most appropriate, but scales could be presented vertically or horizontally, categories could be expressed in terms 130

of boxes, discrete lines, or units on a continuum and may or may not have numbers assigned to them, and numerical values could be positive or negative or both. The students should decide which format to use for the scales. Have them justify their reasons for the scale they choose. Summarize the discussion on rating scale decisions using Table 10.2. Opening Question 4 * Explain the criteria used to evaluate a multi-item scale. 1. Measurement accuracy: refers to capturing the responses as the respondent intended them to be understood. Errors can result from either systematic error, which affects the observed score in the same way on every measurement, or random error, which varies with every measurement. 2. Reliability: refers to the extent to which a scale produces consistent results if repeated measurements are made on the characteristic. Thus, the scale is free from random error. 3. Validity: refers to the accuracy of measurement. Validity of a scale may be defined as the extent to which differences in observed scale scores reflect true differences among objects on the characteristic being measured, rather than systematic or random errors. 4. Generalizability: refers to the extent to which one can generalize from the observations at hand to the set of all conditions of measurement over which the investigator wishes to generalize, called the universe of generalization. Figure 10.6 can be used to discuss the issues involved in scale evaluation. * Explain how validity is measured. To address this topic, you must first distinguish the types of validity: content, criterion and construct. This underscores the point that measurement and theory are inextricably intertwined. 1. Content Validity - A subjective evaluation by experts in the domain being studied to determine if all relevant items are covered in the study. Thus, in the auto industry for example, auto experts (experienced professionals, professors, etc.) would evaluate the scale on the items it covers vis--vis what they consider relevant real world factors. 2. Criterion Validity - A comparative study of the chosen measurement scale's performance in relation to other variables selected as meaningful is conducted. This can be either concurrent or predictive. Thus, two measurements are made of the same variable and the results compared for consistency. 3. Construct Validity - This entails a theoretical investigation of the construct the scale is measuring. It tries to assess why the scale works and the nature of the theory underlying the scale. Convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity are assessed. The example on selfconcept in the text will prove helpful.

Opening Question 5 * Discuss the SERVQUAL scale for measuring quality.

131

SERVQUAL, a multi-item, noncomparative scale, was developed to measure service quality. The original SERVQUAL proposed 10 dimensions on which service quality was rated: reliability, responsiveness, competence, access, courtesy, communication, credibility, security, understanding/knowing the customer, and tangibles. These 10 dimensions were later combined into five: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. SERVQUAL can be divided into two sections. The first section collects data about respondents feelings toward quality firms possessing certain features or attributes. The second section ask respondents to rate to what extent they believe a firm has certain attributes. The answers from the first section give a measure of a consumer's expectations for certain attributes for a quality firm. The second section measures the consumers perceptions for a given firm on the same attributes. SERVQUAL uses the difference between the perception and expectation measures as a measure of quality. Opening Question 6 * Discuss pan-cultural scales vs. scales that use a self-defined cultural norm. The pan-cultural approach is used to develop scales, which are free of cultural biases. Of the scaling techniques we have considered, the semantic differential scale may be said to be pancultural. It has been tested in a number of countries and has consistently produced similar results. An alternative approach is to develop scales that use a self-defined cultural norm as a base referent. This approach is useful for measuring attitudes that are defined relative to cultural norms (e.g., attitude toward marital roles). In developing response formats, verbal rating scales appear to be the most suitable. * Identify other international concerns. Special attention should be devoted to determining equivalent verbal descriptors in different languages and cultures. It is important that the scale end points and the verbal descriptors be employed in a manner that is consistent with the culture. In designing the scale or response format, respondents' educational or literacy levels should be taken into account. It is critical to establish the equivalence of scales and measures used to obtain data from different countries.

Opening Question 7 * Discuss the role of technology in facilitating noncomparative scaling.

Database managers, such as dBASE, allow researchers to develop scales and test their appropriateness for a particular application. Specialized programs, such as ATTITUDE SCALES by Persimmon Software, construct a variety of rating scales for measuring attitudes in marketing and opinion research. EZWRITER by Computers for Marketing Corporation (CfMC) of San Francisco can customize scales for printed questionnaires or for use by telephone interviewers at computer screens in a fraction of the time this would take without automation. Another technological development is smart instruments that can constantly monitor their own condition and the quality of the information they provide. They can also talk directly

132

to the other components of the measurement process, making the integration and processing of information quick and reliable. Discuss the Option Finder. Opening Question 8 * Discuss the ethical implications of misusing scale descriptors Ethical issues can arise in the construction of noncomparative scales. Consider, for example, the use of scale descriptors. The descriptors used to frame a scale can be manipulated to bias results in any direction. A researcher who wants to project the client's brand favorably can ask respondents to indicate their opinion of the brand on several attributes using seven-point scales framed by the descriptors from extremely poor to good. Using a strongly negative descriptor with only a mildly positive one has an interesting effect. As long as the product is not the worst, respondents will be reluctant to rate the product extremely poorly. In fact, respondents who believe the product to be only mediocre will end up responding favorably. Try this yourself. How would you rate BMW automobiles on the following attributes? Reliability Performance Quality: Prestige: Horrible Very poor One of the worst Very low 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 Good Good Good Good

Thus, we see how important it is to use balanced scales with comparable positive and negative descriptors. When this guide is not practiced, responses are biased and should be interpreted accordingly. * Identify other areas of ethical concern. Ethical concerns also underscore the need to adequately establish the reliability, validity, and generalizability of scales before using them in a research project. Scales that are invalid, unreliable, or not generalizable to the target market provide the client with flawed results and misleading findings, thus raising serious ethical issues. Opening Question 9 * Discuss the use of the Internet in scale development and testing. Continuous rating scales may be easily implemented on the Internet. The cursor can be moved on the screen in a continuous fashion to select the exact position on the scale which best describes the respondents evaluation. Moreover, the scale values can be automatically scored by the computer, thus increasing the speed and accuracy of processing the data. Similarly, it is also easy to implement all three itemized rating scales on the Internet. Moreover, using the Internet, one can search for and locate similar scales used by other researchers. The Office of Scales Research at Southern Illinois University-Carbondale, best known for the production of Marketing Scales Handbook, has posted its technical reports on the Internet (http://www.siu.edu/departments/coba/mktg/osr). * Discuss the use of EZWRITER in scale development and testing. 133

EZWRITER uses a series of menu-driven screens to guide the market researcher through the scale development process. EZWRITER can customize scales for printed questionnaires or for use by telephone interviewers at computer screens in a fraction of the time this would take without automation. BE AN MR! AND BE A DM! It should be noted that a variety of answers are appropriate. The ones given here are merely illustrative. Be an MR!: Disney Information on movie preferences can be obtained from sources such as http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/sfischo/media3.html. There are a number of bodies offering secondary data on ratings of individual movies based on surveys and opinion polls. Prominent among them is Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). Ratings for any movie can be obtained from their database which can be accessed through the following link. http://www.mpaa.org/movieratings/search/index.htm Be a DM!: Disney Ratings for similar movies which were released in the same season can be studied to get an idea of possible reaction from audience. As the movie is being made, audience reaction can be measured using continuous measurement or itemized rating scales. The movie can be altered to the taste of the audience. No simple formula Study responses to various movie types Analyze changing trends and tastes Understand demographic, ethnic and gender centric preferences Understand the popularity of actors and actresses and perceptions about them in the minds of the viewers Be a DM!: Diet Coke Identify which attitudes are most relevant to the product and purchase decision. Customers can be segmented along attitudinal and demographic lines such as age, sex, region, social status etc for segmentation. Design and position products to satisfy these segments.

Be an MR!: Diet Coke Likert scale: I like Diet Coke, overall Diet Coke offers good value Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Disagree Agree 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5

134

Diet Coke tastes good Diet Coke is healthy

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

Semantic differential scale: Diet Coke is: Good overall Good value Good tasting Healthy Stapel scale: Diet Coke is: +5 +4 +3 +2 +1 Good overall -1 -2 -3 -4 -5

-- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- --

Not good overall Not good value Not good tasting Not healthy

+5 +4 +3 +2 +1 Good value -1 -2 -3 -4 -5

+5 +4 +3 +2 +1 Good Tasting -1 -2 -3 -4 -5

+5 +4 +3 +2 +1 Healthy -1 -2 -3 -4 -5

I would recommend the Likert Scale as it widely used to measure attitudes and preferences. Be an MR!: Rockport A Likert Scale can be used to measure consumer preferences. Hypotheses can be formed as to what is important to the customers and what is their preference? The hypothesis can be tested against customer opinion using a Likert scale model survey. Likert scale: Strongly Disagree Neutral Disagree I prefer dress shoes to casual shoes 1 2 3 Agree 4 Strongly Agree 5

Be a DM!: Rockport Consumer preferences can be used to improve design. Make tradeoffs between more desirable versus less desirable features. Find demographic changes in tastes. Use this information for market segmentation. Ensure product-segment fit.

135

EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING Identifying Comparative and Non-comparative Scales Using Surveyz! 1. How many types of comparative scales are available in Surveyz!? Answer: Rank order and constant sum are directly available. (The matrix table formatted in spreadsheet form could also be used for paired comparison.) How many format options are available for these comparative scales? Answer: One each. How many types of noncomparative scales are available in Surveyz!? Answer: Semantic differentia, and Likert scales are directly available. How many format options are available? Answer: One each.

2. 3. 4.

McCann Erickson and Ad Promises 1. Students should download and read (10a) McCann Erickson Experiential Learning file. 2. The results are presented in (10c) Ad promises reversed (SPSS file). 3. a. and b. Note: The Cronbach alpha values are included in bold italics after each constructs label below. Each Cronbach alpha was computed with a sample size of 413. For the composite variables, each of the eight different composite variables should have values ranging from 1 to 8. Ad Promise Scale Items 1. Problem removal .728 a. The brand would help remove a problem one may encounter b. One would go from feeling annoyance to feeling relief as a result of using the brand. c. Using the brand would NOT appeal to ones desire for resuming the pursuit of a goal. 2. Problem avoidance .776 a. Using the brand would enable one to avoid a potential problem. b. The brand would dissipate fear and bring one a feeling of relaxation. c. Ones desire for a threat-free pursuit of a goal would NOT be met by using the brand. 3. Incomplete satisfaction .811 a. The brand would bridge the gap between ones expectations and the existing circumstances in a situation. b. The brand would bring an optimistic outlook to an otherwise disappointing situation. c. Ones desire for more complete satisfaction would NOT be met by using the brand. 4. Mixed approach-avoidance .810 a. The brand would take care of one of the remaining negative aspects of a situation. 136

5.

6.

7.

8.

b. Using the brand would avoid impending conflict and bring peace of mind. c. Ones desire for more consistency in thoughts about an object or issue would NOT be met by using the brand. Sensual gratification .817 a. A sample of the brand would make one want more. b. Using the brand would take one from a neutral state to a pleasurable state. c. The brand would NOT appeal to ones bodily senses. Intellectual stimulation.767 a. The brand would stimulate ones intellect. b. The brand would relieve boredom. c. The brand would NOT appeal to my sense of adventure or risk. Social approval .904 a. One would be considered more fashionable by using the brand. b. The brand would help one feel less apprehensive in social situations. c. The brand would NOT appeal to ones desire for social approval. Intrinsic satisfaction .605 a. Using the brand is its own reward. b. The brand would be enjoyed for its own sake, not for what it will bring one. c. Pure enjoyment of the brand would NOT be the only thing in it for someone.

WHAT WOULD YOU DO? It should be noted that a variety of answers are appropriate. The ones given here are merely illustrative. The Marketing Research Decision 1. C 2. In matching jobs with applicants skills is critical to the success of Monster. Semantic Differential is an effective scaling technique for capturing varied levels of expertise. The job applicants can be required to fill in a profile which includes semantic differential scales for measuring different skill levels. On the other hand the skill levels required of various jobs could be captured using the same scales. By using software functionality, the job descriptions can be automatically matched with applicants profiles based on skills. The Marketing Management Decision 1. C, D, E 2. The biggest advantage of Monster from a recruiters perspective is efficiency at a reduced cost. This is primarily because of a large applicant pool. Monster acts as a centralized database with a very large and varied applicant pool and sophisticated search and matching options. As a web-based medium, Monster already offers a substantial cost advantage over the conventional means, so further reduction of prices would not be a selling point. The current search options are very sophisticated; however, any improvement in this front can better the competitive position. Tthe biggest attraction for employers is the size and quality of the applicants., so any promotional activity to attract more resumes will be to Monsters advantage. REVIEW QUESTIONS

137

1.

2. 3.

4.

5. 6. 7.

8. 9.

10. 11. 12. 13.

A semantic differential is a seven-point rating scale with end points associated with bipolar labels that have semantic meaning. This scale is used in comparing brand, product, and company images, developing advertising and promotion strategies, new product development studies, and in a variety of other applications. The Likert scale requires the respondents to indicate a degree of agreement or disagreement with each of a series of statements related to the stimulus objects. The differences between the Staple scale and the semantic differential is that in the Staple scale there is no need to pretest the adjectives or phrases to ensure true bipolarity, and the Staple scale can also be administered over the telephone. The semantic differential is more popular than the Staple scale. The major decisions involved in constructing an itemized rating scale are: i. The number of scale categories to use. ii. Balanced versus unbalanced scale. iii. Odd or even number of categories. iv. Forced versus nonforced nature of the scale. v. The nature and degree of verbal description to employ. vi. The physical form of the scale. The amount of scale categories that should be used in an itemized rating scale should be between five and nine; however, there is no single, optimal number of categories which would be applicable for all scaling situations. The difference between balanced versus unbalanced is that a balanced scale has an equal number of favorable and unfavorable categories that are used, whereas the unbalanced scale does not have an equal number of favorable and unfavorable categories. The decision regarding an odd or even number of categories should depend on whether some of the respondents may be neutral on the response being measured. If a neutral or indifferent scale response is a possibility for at least some of the respondents, an odd number of categories should be used. If the researcher wants to force a response to indicate some degree of favorableness or unfavorableness, or it is believed that no neutral or indifferent response exists, a rating scale with an even number of categories should be used. The difference between a forced and nonforced scale is that a forced scale does not have a "no opinion" or "no knowledge" option, whereas a nonforced scale includes a "no opinion" or "no knowledge" category. The nature and degree of verbal description can affect the response to itemized rating scales due to the strength of the adjectives used to anchor the scale. With strong anchors, respondents are less likely to use the extreme scale categories, thus strong anchors result in less variable and more peaked response distributions. Weak anchors have a tendency to produce uniform or flat distributions. Multi-item scales consist of a number of rating scale items where the responses are usually summed over the items to determine an overall or total score. An example would be the Likert attitude scale given in this chapter. Reliability refers to the extent to which a scale produces consistent results if repeated measurements are made on the characteristics. The major differences between the two are that test-retest reliability administers the same scale two different times and measures the correlation between the results. Alternativeforms reliability uses two equivalent forms of a scale for the two tests. The internal consistency reliability approach can be applied to assess the reliability of a summated scale where several items are summed to form a total score. Each item can be 138

14. 15.

16.

17.

considered to measure the marketing construct in question and the items should be consistent in what they indicate about the construct. Validity refers to the accuracy of measurement. Validity of a scale may be defined as the extent to which differences in observed scale scores reflect true differences among objects on the characteristic being measured, rather than systematic or random errors. Criterion validity examines whether the measurement scale performs as expected in relation to other variables selected as meaningful criteria. Criterion validity is assessed when the data on the scale being evaluated and the criterion variables are collected at the same time. The relationship between reliability and validity can be understood in terms of the true score model. If a measure is perfectly valid, it is also perfectly reliable. If a measure is perfectly reliable, it may or may not be perfectly valid, as systematic error may still be present. The lack of reliability constitutes negative evidence for validity. Reliability is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for validity. When choosing a particular scaling technique, an attempt should be made to use the scaling technique, which will yield the highest level of information feasible in the given situation. In many situations it may be desirable to use more than one scaling technique or to obtain additional measures using procedures other than the conventional scaling techniques.

APPLIED PROBLEMS 1. The following are examples of each scale. Student answers may vary, but should have similar form. Likert Scale Instructions: Listed below are statements that describe different opinions about Store X. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement by using the following scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 1. I do most of my 1 shopping at store X. Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree 3 Agree Strongly Agree 4 5

139

Semantic Differential Instructions: This study measures different concepts related to Store X. Place an X along the line according to how well the subject is related to the adjectives on the end of the scale. 1. I do most of my shopping at store X. Never --:--:--:--:--:--:-- Always Stapel Scale Instructions: Please evaluate how accurately the word or phrase describes each of the subjects (e.g., Store X) listed below by selecting a number for the word(s). The more accurately you think the words describe the subject, the larger the plus number you should choose. You should select a minus number for words you think do not describe the subject accurately. The more accurately you think the word describes it, the larger the plus number you should choose. Therefore, you can select any number from +5 for words that you think are very accurate, all the way to -5, for words that you think are very inaccurate. -----------------------------------------------Store X -----------------------------------------------+5 +4 +3 +2 +1 I do most of my shopping at this store -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 Many variations of the scale can be constructed. It should be a multi-item scale and should have anchors that are both understandable and relevant to attitudes on internationalization of the management curriculum. The scale should contain 5 to 9 values and be uniform throughout the items. Reverse scoring should be used. For assessing reliability see the answers to questions 11, 12 and 13. For assessing validity see the answer to questions 14 and 15. Listed below are statements, which describe different opinions about the Internet. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement: Strongly Disagree 140 Neither Agree Strongly

2.

3.

Disagree 1. The Internet is a useful source of general information. 2. It is easy to find information on the Internet. 3. When I need information, I would rather read the newspaper than surf the Internet. 1 2

Agree nor Disagree 3 4

Agree 5

4. Likert scales can be developed to measure the usefulness of Ford Motor Companys Web site at www.ford.com. Scale items should include: availability of information, visual search, price information availability, ease of navigation, dealer information and linkages to dealers and other relevant sites, service to customers, user groups and links to user groups, and the visual attractiveness of site. 5. Bi-polar adjectives such as reliable - unreliable, on-time delivery - late delivery, trustworthy untrustworthy, global service - domestic service, customer friendly - customer unfriendly, competitively priced - high priced, excellent service - poor service, etc. can be used. 6. Several different applications can be identified. The scales should be related to specific marketing research and corresponding managerial contexts. 7. The URLs of several marketing research firms are given in Chapter 1 (Table 1.1). The criteria for evaluation should follow the guidelines for rating scale decisions (see Table 10.2) 8. Many types of examples can be created. The Likert type scales are the most popular. GROUP DISCUSSION 1. The issues behind this statement center on the appropriateness of a particular scale. There is a great difference in the results obtained from comparative and noncomparative scales and this distinction should be made. In addition, for noncomparative scales, the researcher must make decisions with respect to the number of scale categories, balanced versus unbalanced scales, odd or even number of categories, forced versus non forced scales, nature and degree of verbal description, and the physical form or configuration. Each of these decisions will affect the information gathered from respondents and should be discussed. Finally, the nature of reliability is important to consider. Even though a scale is reliable, it does not mean that the information is pertinent to the issue at hand. Misapplied scales can be very reliable, yet be of little help or even misleading if they do not relate to the problem at hand. The issues of reliability and validity are critical in applied marketing research, since actual decisions will be made and dollars spent based on the assumed reliability and validity of a scale. On the other hand, if the scale has been shown to be reliable and valid from past experience, testing reliability and validity is not critical. However, for newly devised scales or scales used for the first time in a particular context, reliability and validity should be examined to ensure accurate results.

2.

141

3.

Any one of readings can be selected. The discussion should be related to one or more of the concepts discussed in this chapter.

142