Topics to be covered

Data entry
Metric and non metric data
measurement scales
Validity & reliability measurement
Cronbach alpha
Descriptive analysis

Scales of Measurement
Nominal scale
Ordinal scale
Interval scale
Ratio scale
Contd.
Nominal Scale: When data are labels or
names used to identify the attribute of an
element, the nominal scale is used.
Ordinal Scale: In addition to nominal level
data capacities, ordinal scale can be used to
rank or order objects.

Contd.
Interval Scale: In interval level measurement, the
difference between two consecutive numbers is
meaningful.
Ratio Scale: Ratio level measurements possess all the
properties of interval data with meaningful ratio of
two values.
In terms of measurement capacity, nominal, ordinal,
interval, and ratio level data are placed in ascending
order.
A comparison between the four levels of data measurement in
terms of usage potential
The Criteria for Good Measurement
1. Validity
In fact, validity is the ability of an instrument
to measure what is designed to measure.
It sounds simple that a measure should
measure what it is supposed to measure but
has a great deal of difficulty in real life.
1(a) Content Validity
The content validation includes, but is not
limited to, careful specification of constructs,
review of scaling procedures by content validity
judges, and consultation with experts and the
members of the population.
Sometimes, the content validity is also referred
as face validity.
In fact, the content validity is a subjective
evaluation of the scale for its ability to measure
what it is supposed to measure.

1(b) Criterion Validity
The criterion validity is the ability of the variable
to predict the key variables or criteria.
It involves the determination of whether the
scale is able to perform up to the expectation
with respect to the other variables or criteria.
Criterion variables may include demographic and
psychographic characteristics, attitudinal and
behavioural measures, or scales obtained from
other scales.

1(c) Construct Validity
The construct validity is the initial concept, notion,
question, or hypothesis that determines which data are to
be generated and how they are to be gathered.
To achieve the construct validity, the researcher must
focus on convergent validity and discriminant validity.
The convergent validity is established when the new
measure correlates or converges with other similar
measures.
The literal meaning of correlation or convergence
specifically indicates the degree to which the score on one
measuring instrument (scale) is correlated with other
measuring instrument (scale) developed to measure the
same constructs
Discriminant validity
Discriminant validity is established when a new
measuring instrument has low correlation or
nonconvergence with the measures of dissimilar
concept.
The literal meaning of no correlation or non-
convergence specifically indicates the degree to which
the score on one measuring instrument (scale) is not
correlated with the other measuring instrument
(scale) developed to measure the different constructs.
To establish the construct validity, a researcher has to
establish the convergent validity and discriminant
validity
2. Reliability
Reliability is the tendency of a respondent to respond in
the same or in a similar manner to an identical or a near
identical question.
A measure is said to be reliable when it elicits the same
response from the same person when the measuring
instrument is administered to that person successively in
similar or almost similar circumstances.
Reliable measuring instruments provide confidence to a
researcher that the transient and situational factors are
not intervening in the process, and hence, the measuring
instrument is robust.
A researcher can adopt three ways to handle the issue of
reliability: testretest reliability, equivalent forms
reliability, and internal consistency reliability.

2(a) TestRetest Reliability
To execute the testretest reliability, the same
questionnaire is administered to the same
respondents to elicit responses in two different time
slots.
As a next step, the degree of similarity between the
two sets of responses is determined.
To assess the degree of similarity between the two
sets of responses, correlation coefficient is computed.
Higher correlation coefficient indicates a higher
reliable measuring instrument, and lower correlation
coefficient indicates an unreliable measuring
instrument
2(b) Equivalent Forms
Reliability
In testretest reliability, a researcher considers
personal and situation fluctuation in responses
in two different time periods, whereas in the
case of considering equivalent forms reliability,
two equivalent forms are administered to the
subjects at two different times.
To measure the desired characteristics of
interest, two equivalent forms are constructed
with different sample of items. Both the forms
contain the same type of questions and the
same structure with some specific difference.

2(c) Internal Consistency
Reliability
The internal consistency reliability is used to assess the reliability of a
summated scale by which several items are summed to form a total
score.
The basic approach to measure the internal consistency reliability is split-
half technique.
In this technique, the items are divided into equivalent groups. This
division is done on the basis of some predefined aspects as odd versus
even number questions in the questionnaire or split of items randomly.
After division, responses on items are correlated. High correlation
coefficient indicates high internal consistency, and low correlation
coefficient indicates low internal consistency.
Subjectivity in the process of splitting the items into two parts poses
some common problems for the researchers.
A very common approach to deal with this problem is coefficient alpha
or Cronbachs alpha.

The Coefficient Alpha or
Cronbachs Alpha
The coefficient alpha or Cronbachs alpha is
actually a mean reliability coefficient for all
the different ways of splitting the items
included in the measuring instruments.
As different from correlation coefficient,
coefficient alpha varies from 0 to 1, and a
coefficient value of 0.6 or less is considered
to be unsatisfactory.

3. Sensitivity
Sensitivity is the ability of a measuring instrument to
measure the meaningful difference in the responses
obtained from the subjects included in the study.
It is to be noted that the dichotomous categories of
response such as yes or no can generate a great deal or
variability in the responses.
Hence, a scale with many items as a sensitive measure is
required.
For example, a scale based on five categories of responses,
such as strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor
disagree, agree, and strongly agree, presents a more
sensitive measuring instrument.

Measurement Scales
Comparative scales are based on the direct comparison of
stimulus and generally generate some ranking or ordinal data.
This is the reason why these scales are sometimes referred as non-
metric scales. Non-comparative scaling techniques generally
involve the use of a rating scale, and the resulting data are interval
or ratio in nature.
This is the reason why these scales are referred as monadic scales
or metric scales by some business researchers.
This section is an attempt to discuss the various types of scales in
the light of items included in the scales.
These are single-item scales, multi-item scales, and continuous
rating scales.

The classification of measurement scales
1. Single-Item Scales
As clear from the name, the single-item
scales measure only one item as a construct.
Some of the commonly used single-item
scales in the field of business research are
multiple choice scales, forced-ranking scales,
paired-comparison scales, constant-sum
scales, direct quantification scales, and Q-sort
scales.

Researcher tries to generate some basic information to
conduct his or her research work, and for the sake of
convenience or further analysis, he or she codes it by
assigning different numbers to different characteristics of
interest.
This type of measurement is commonly referred as
multiple-choice scale and results in generating the
nominal data. In this type of scale, the researcher poses a
single question with multiple response alternatives.
For a mere quantification reason, a researcher assigns 1 to
the first response, 2 to the second response, and so on. It
is important to note that the numbers provide only the
nominal information.

1(a) Multiple-Choice Scale
Examples of multiple-choice scales
1(b) Forced-Choice
Ranking
In the forced-choice ranking scaling technique,
the respondents rank different objects
simultaneously from a list of objects
presented to them
Example of forced-choice scale
1(c) Paired-Comparison
Technique
As the name indicates, in the paired-comparison scaling
technique, a respondent is presented a pair of objects or
stimulus or brands and the respondent is supposed to
provide his or her preference of the object from a pair.
When n items (objects or brands) are included in the study,
a respondent has to make n(n 1) / 2 paired comparisons.
Sometimes, a researcher uses the principle of
transitivity to analyse the data obtained from a paired-
comparison scaling technique. Transitivity is a simple
concept that says that if Brand X is preferred over Brand
Y and Brand Y is preferred over Brand Z, then Brand
X is also preferred over Brand Z
Example of paired comparison scaling technique
1(d) Constant-Sum Scales
In the constant-sum scaling technique, the
respondents allocate points to more than one
stimulus objects or object attributes or object
properties, such that the total remains a
constant sum of usually 10 or 100.
The sum of all the points should be equal to a
predefined constant 100 or 10, which is why this
scale is called the constant-sum scale. This
scaling technique generates the ratio-level data.

Example of a constant-sum scale
1(e) Direct Quantification
Scale
The simplest form of obtaining information is
to directly ask a question related to some
characteristics of interest resulting in ratio-
scaled data. Researchers generally ask a
question related to payment intention of
consumers.

Example of the direct quantification scale
1(f) Q-Sort Scales
The objective of the Q-sort scaling technique
is to quickly classify a large number of
objects. In this kind of scaling technique, the
respondents are presented with a set of
statements, and they classify it on the basis of
some predefined number of categories (piles),
usually 11
2. Multi-Item Scales
Multi-item scaling techniques generally generate
some interval type of information. In interval
scaling technique, a scale is constructed with the
number or description associated with each
scale position. Therefore, the respondents rating
on certain characteristics of interest is obtained.
For the majority of researchers, the rating scales
are the preferred measuring device to obtain
interval (or quasi-interval) data on the personal
characteristics (i.e., attitude, preference, and
opinions) of the individuals of all kind.

2(a) Summated Scaling
Technique:
The Likert Scales
In a Likert scale, each item response has five rating categories,
strongly disagree to strongly agree as two extremes with
disagree, neither agree nor disagree, and agree in the middle
of the scale. Typically, a 1- to 5-point rating scale is used, but few
researchers also use another set of numbers such as 2, 1, 0, +1,
and +2.
The analysis can be done by using either profile analysis or
summated analysis.
The profile analysis is item-by-item analysis, where the
respondents scores are obtained for each item of the scale, and
the analysis is also done on the basis of individual item scores. As
another approach, scores are obtained from the respondents, and
the sum is obtained across the scale items. After summing, an
average is obtained for all the respondents. The summated
approach is widely used, which is why the Likert scale is also
referred as the summated scale
Example of Likert scale
2(b) Semantic Differential
Scales
The semantic differential scale consists of a
series of bipolar adjectival words or phrases
placed on the two extreme points of the
scale.
Good semantic differential scales keep some
negative adjectives and some positive
adjectives on the left side of the scale to
tackle the problem of the halo effect.

Example of semantic differential scale
2(c) Staple Scales
The staple scale is generally presented
vertically with a single adjective or phrase in
the centre of the positive and negative
ratings.
Similar to the Likert scale and the semantic
differential scale, in a staple scale, points are
at equidistant position both physically and
numerically, which usually results in the
interval-scaled responses.

Example of staple scale
2(d) Numerical Scales
Numerical scales provide equal intervals
separated by numbers, as scale points to the
respondents. These scales are generally 5- or
7-point rating scales
Example of numerical scale
(3) Continuous Rating Scales
In a continuous rating scale, the respondents
rate the object by placing a mark on a
continuum to indicate their attitude. In this
scale, the two ends of continuum represent the
two extremes of the measuring phenomenon.
This scale is also referred as a graphing rating
scale and allows a respondent to select his or
her own rating point instead of the rating points
predefined by the researcher
Example of a continuous rating scale