7-point Likert scale or 5-point

[Hoshiar Mal]

Respected Members,

I am confused between the 7-point Likert scale and 5-point. I wanted to use the 7-Point Likert scale to give the respondent good variability, but I cannot support my reasoning with Literature. Can anyone help me in this regards?

Regards,

Hoshiar Mal

[Kumar Aashish]

Best possible excuse would be "..... on the basis of pilot study, researchers got the feedback from respondents ..... and hence, opted for 7 points instead of 5..."

--
Protocols of this Group:
 
1. Plz search previous post in group before posing the question.
2. Don't write query in someone's post. Always use the option of New topic for the new question. You can do this by writing to dataanalys...@googlegroups.com
3. Its better to give a proper subject to your post/query. It'll help others while searching.
4. Never write Open ended queries. This group intend to help research scholars NOT FOR WORK THEM.
5. Never write words like URGENT in ur posts. People will help them when they are free.
6. Never upload any info about National Seminars/Conferences. Send such info on personal emails. And feel free to share any RESEARCH related info.
7. No Happy New Year, Happy Diwali, Happy Holi, Happy B'day, Happy Anniversary etc. allowed on this group.
8. Few months back there was a facility for asking & sharing the Research Papers. Now there is no provision of asking for the research paper here.
 
Let’s make a better research environment.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataAnalysis" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dataanalysistrai...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/CAKcCkq0u2xAE4pTHWnMYR2sy6fWS2aX%3DB3MN3WoM2LOr4BMLBw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Kumar Aashish

Assistant Professor

Institute of Public Enterprise - Hyderabad, India

Fellow - Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India

Contact No. +91-8238976475

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kumar_Aashish3

https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=2D2I77oAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra

https://kumaraashish.wordpress.com/

The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.

[Neeraj Kaushik]

Nice reply Ashish

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/CAFad_xXhTb%3DPDpas_-%3Dje2HXwGLmhyu25jX%2B53hEdV9mYjeb9A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Hoshiar Mal]

Dear Sir,

I uses 7 point scale in my pilot and get satisfactory results. My Research Advisory Committee is asking me “why I took 7 point scale”. They said 5 points is always better than 7 hence, I asked my doubts, Sir. 

On 19-Jan-2021, at 8:55 PM, Neeraj Kaushik <kaushi...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/CAAd%3Dc8NDdEAGoqpO%3DMO%2BrLxopBHOrji85QDWDc_Ji4tZuDUvAQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jaminiranjan Meher]

Dear Sir,

Please find the attached file. This could help you.

Regards

Jamini Ranjan Meher

Research Scholar

Sambalpur University

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/FA427F50-5961-4A39-AE96-0F8E51C1C679%40gmail.com.

[Dr. Rahul Pratap Singh Kaurav]

I have an idea:

7 point scale is more sensitive to get the observation. ON the five-point scale the participants were not feeling free and they were expecting more freedom while recording their responses. 

I hope this will help you,

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:24 AM Hoshiar Mal <hosh...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/FA427F50-5961-4A39-AE96-0F8E51C1C679%40gmail.com.

--

Dr Rahul Pratap Singh Kaurav Assistant Professor | Prestige Institute of Management, Gwalior Associate Editor | PIJMIT Sanchayan mobile: +91 98265 69573  email: rsingh...@gmail.com address: Airport Road, Gwalior, MP, India

Recent Papers: New Education Policy, 2020: Qualitative (Contents) Analysis and Twitter Mining (Sentiment) Analysis Technology-Driven Tourism and Hospitality Industry as a Tool for Economic Development: A bibliometric analysis Segmenting the Domestic Rural Tourists in India Determinants of mobile apps adoption among young adults: theoretical extension and analysis Impact of individual market orientation on selling and customer orientation An SPSS Guide for Tourism,  Hospitality, and Events Researchers by Routledge

[Hoshiar Mal]

Dear Dr  Singh,

I completely agree with you and I gave the same interpretation to my "Research Advisory Committee". They are asking to endorse the statement with the literature. 

I received one research paper from Mr  Jaminiranjan Meher in the morning hours. I couldn't go through yet to give my comment. Can you have some more literature on that, sir?

Regards, 

Hoshiar Mal

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/CALkJBxHYhqfpkHhYyET0Sp9%3DNS5Sf5H7eFCNqf%2B2DeHK1Ouhqg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kumar Aashish]

Dear Prof.

Committee members argument seems to have contaminated understanding about scales (Point of discussion should be reliability and validity of statements, and their relevance with the context in which you are using), there is no point in arguing why 7 instead of 5. If you would have changed odd number to even or reverse, It would be a matter of concern.

Ideally it happens in reverse mode that the original scale contains 7 pointer or even higher, and when a developing country researcher adopts, claims that the respondents of India or of this study are not that much sensitized to the research protocols and unable to give response on 11 or 7 points and they reported confusion in the understanding about their own response hence researcher simplified it SD - 1 to SA - 5.

However, as per your reply, the case at hand is just opposite. 

The great relief is that committee members are not questioning the rationale behind questionnaire adoption and related wordings. and you are still on odd number (5 pointer) to odd number (7 pointer).

With the limited or no understanding about your research project any group member's suggestion is just a random guess work. And I am making one.

First refer the scale/measurement tool - statements (I assume you adopted an established scale) and related pointers (If it talks about 5 points or so). Make a deep dive in the methodology - sample protocol section and the demographic characters of respondents. Narrate some story about the difference among the Indian context respondents and the original context in which that paper belongs to, referring this your peer group researchers has suggested keeping the growing sensitization about research participation among respondents. Its good to give them ample space to locate reality accurately (anyway pointers are perceptual only not accurate as age, weight, salary, yes or no) and hence researcher chosen 7 point scale. 

And even if committee says ".... 5 points is always better than 7 hence,....." Politely ask for its reference. (with a smile)

Please take it on positive note!!!

Best Wishes!!!

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:24 AM Hoshiar Mal <hosh...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/FA427F50-5961-4A39-AE96-0F8E51C1C679%40gmail.com.

[Hoshiar Mal]

Dear Sir,

Thank you so much for your reply.  I adopted an established scale, and the original scale used 5 points. I have gone through paper sent by Mr  Jaminiranjan Meher, and this paper mentioned that "5 points Likert scale is better alternatives than the default 7-point scale with labels at the endpoints as the results indicate that a 5-point scale with labels at the extremes result in better data quality, as it leads to lower Midpoint Response". 

I am planning to for 5 point scale instead of 7.

Regards,

Hoshiar Mal

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/CAFad_xVUM7FRveGVhjj87p_UT3rj%3DWJt4TSC4fdZ8rt8odzVqg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dr. Rahul Pratap Singh Kaurav]

Dear Hoshiar,

I have faced the same problem. While publishing one A category paper. One reviewer has stuck with this type of similar situation. 

The papers attached to this email has helped me. Hope you will find them suitable.

Best Wishes, 

[Atul Shiva]

In my opinion, the papers shared by Dr Rahul are final answers to stop using 5 point scales in study. Thank you Dr Rahul for sharing such wonderful citations for using 7 point scale. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dataanalysistraining/CALkJBxHu7nSJ_oCM67WW4f2pRuiBcT_6eWRS2m4sM9-4mx1Cuw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Dr. Atul Shiva
Assistant Professor of Management

University School of Business - Department MBA
Chandigarh University
atul...@gmail.com
+91-8427001687

[Hoshiar Mal]

Dear Sir,

Thank you so much for your time. These paper are simply excellent!

Regards,

Hoshiar Mal

[Akash Saharan]

Dear All,

I was fascinated by this discussion sometime back. Recently found this article and thought of sharing it here with two objectives:

1. Stop using AHP, ISM, BWM, DEMATEL, PROMETHE or other similar MCDM techniques in management research as new MCDM techniques have emerged such as SWARA (Step‐wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis) method (Valipour et al., 2017), FUCOM (FUll COnsistency Method) (Pamučar et al., 2018);  Ordinal Priority Approach (OPA) (Ataei et al., 2020); Level Based Weight Assessment model (LBWA) (Žižović and Pamučar, 2019); or Defining Interrelationships Between Ranked Criteria (DIBR) (Pamucar et al., 2021)

2. For likert type and scale selection these citations and content from the attached article can be of some help: The capacity of individuals to simultaneously compare multiple criteria depends on several factors, encompassing cognitive capacity, attention span, and the complexity of the criteria under consideration. While some people may have the capability to process and compare more than eight criteria at the same time, it can be challenging for many individuals. The human brain has a limited capacity for processing information, and working memory plays a crucial role in holding and manipulating information during cognitive tasks. Research suggests that the average person’s working memory can hold around seven (plus or minus two) chunks of information at a time. This means that comparing more than seven or eight criteria simultaneously can exceed the working memory’s capacity for many people. For example Miller [27] proposed that the average human working memory has a limited capacity of around seven (plus or minus two) chunks of information. This concept, known as Miller’s Law or the “Magical Number Seven”, suggests that people have difficulty simultaneously comparing more than a handful of criteria. Also, Cowan [28] has explored the specific limitations of working memory. He has shown that individuals can hold a small number of items in their working memory simultaneously, typically ranging from three to five items. This constraint can impact the ability to compare a large number of criteria simultaneously. While the literature [27,28] indicates that people may struggle to compare more than a limited number of criteria simultaneously, it is important to consider that individual differences exist, and some individuals may possess superior cognitive abilities or use effective strategies to handle larger amounts of information.

Hope it helps.

Thank you

Regards

Akash Saharan