2013/04/26 by Bert Weijters, Maggie Geuens, Hans Baumgartner · 58 citations
Psychology · Social Sciences · #Artificial intelligence #Behavioral Health and Interventions #Cognitive psychology #Computer science #Contrast (vision) #Developmental psychology #Likert scale #Psychology #Social and Intergroup Psychology #Social psychology
paper · pdf · doi:10.1086/670394
published in Journal of Consumer Research 40(2), 368-381 (Oxford University Press)
openalex publication_date 2013/04/26 · openalex created_date 2016/06/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Surveys in the social sciences often employ rating scales anchored by response category labels such as “strongly (dis)agree” or “completely (dis)agree.” Although these labels may exert a systematic influence on responses since they are common to all items, academic research on the effect of different labels is surprisingly scarce. In order to help researchers choose appropriate category labels, we contrast the intensity hypothesis (which posits that response categories are endorsed less frequently if the labels are more extreme) with the familiarity hypothesis (which states that response categories are endorsed more frequently if the labels are more common in day-to-day language). In a series of studies we find consistent support for the familiarity hypothesis. Our results have important implications for the appropriate use of category labels in multilingual surveys, and we propose a procedure based on Internet search engine hits to equate labels in different languages in terms of familiarity.