1994/09/01 by Lei Chang
Decision Sciences · Mathematics · Psychology · #Confirmatory factor analysis #Econometrics #Education, Achievement, and Giftedness #Likert scale #Mathematics #Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports #Psychology #Psychometric Methodologies and Testing #Psychometrics #Reliability (semiconductor) #Scale (ratio) #Statistics #Structural equation modeling #Validity
paper · doi:10.1177/014662169401800302
crossref issued 1994/09/01 · crossref published 1994/09/01 · crossref published-online 1994/09/01 · crossref published-print 1994/09/01 · openalex publication_date 1994/09/01 · crossref created 2007/03/18 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref deposited 2026/04/28 · crossref indexed 2026/08/03 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/04
Reliability and validity of 4-point and 6-point scales were assessed using a new model-based ap proach to fit empirical data. Different measurement models were fit by confirmatory factor analyses of a multitrait-multimethod covariance matrix. 165 gradu ate students responded to nine items measuring three quantitative attitudes. Separation of method from trait variance led to greater reduction of reliability and heterotrait-monomethod coefficients for the 6-point scale than for the 4-point scale. Criterion-related valid ity was not affected by the number of scale points. The issue of selecting 4- versus 6-point scales may not be generally resolvable, but may rather depend on the empirical setting. Response conditions theorized to in fluence the use of scale options are discussed to pro vide directions for further research. Index terms: Likert-type scales, multitrait-multimethod matrix, reli ability, scale options, validity.