评级量表和问题属性对通用信任量表有效性和可靠性的影响

IF 2.8 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Social Indicators Research Pub Date : 2024-06-27 DOI:10.1007/s11205-024-03372-1
Blaine G. Robbins
{"title":"评级量表和问题属性对通用信任量表有效性和可靠性的影响","authors":"Blaine G. Robbins","doi":"10.1007/s11205-024-03372-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Trust is important for a range of societal outcomes. Despite its significance, there is considerable debate about how best to measure trust. In the context of a newly developed measure of generalized trust—the Stranger Face Trust scale (SFT)—this study evaluates whether different features of survey scales affect the reliability and validity of SFT, which relies on the standard 4-point unipolar scale used by many survey institutes. In a survey experiment conducted with a non-probability sample of U.S. adults (<i>N</i> = 4252), we randomly assigned intensity scale midpoints, polarity, and “don’t know” options to SFT. Results indicate that 7- and 9-point bipolar scales without a “don’t know” option slightly outperform all other scales on some psychometric tests, particularly those related to formal properties of the scales and factorial validity, but not on psychometric tests assessing survey environment or convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":21943,"journal":{"name":"Social Indicators Research","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Influence of Rating Scales and Question Attributes on the Validity and Reliability of Generalized Trust Scales\",\"authors\":\"Blaine G. Robbins\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11205-024-03372-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Trust is important for a range of societal outcomes. Despite its significance, there is considerable debate about how best to measure trust. In the context of a newly developed measure of generalized trust—the Stranger Face Trust scale (SFT)—this study evaluates whether different features of survey scales affect the reliability and validity of SFT, which relies on the standard 4-point unipolar scale used by many survey institutes. In a survey experiment conducted with a non-probability sample of U.S. adults (<i>N</i> = 4252), we randomly assigned intensity scale midpoints, polarity, and “don’t know” options to SFT. Results indicate that 7- and 9-point bipolar scales without a “don’t know” option slightly outperform all other scales on some psychometric tests, particularly those related to formal properties of the scales and factorial validity, but not on psychometric tests assessing survey environment or convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Indicators Research\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Indicators Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03372-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Indicators Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03372-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

信任对一系列社会结果都很重要。尽管信任非常重要,但关于如何最好地测量信任却存在着相当大的争议。本研究针对新开发的通用信任测量方法--陌生人面孔信任量表(SFT)--评估了调查量表的不同特征是否会影响 SFT 的信度和效度,SFT 依赖于许多调查机构使用的标准 4 点单极量表。在对美国成年人(N = 4252)进行的非概率抽样调查实验中,我们为 SFT 随机分配了强度量表中点、极性和 "不知道 "选项。结果表明,没有 "不知道 "选项的 7 分和 9 分两极量表在某些心理测验中略微优于所有其他量表,特别是与量表的形式属性和因子效度相关的测验,但在评估调查环境或收敛效度、区分效度和并发效度的心理测验中则没有优于其他量表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Influence of Rating Scales and Question Attributes on the Validity and Reliability of Generalized Trust Scales

Trust is important for a range of societal outcomes. Despite its significance, there is considerable debate about how best to measure trust. In the context of a newly developed measure of generalized trust—the Stranger Face Trust scale (SFT)—this study evaluates whether different features of survey scales affect the reliability and validity of SFT, which relies on the standard 4-point unipolar scale used by many survey institutes. In a survey experiment conducted with a non-probability sample of U.S. adults (N = 4252), we randomly assigned intensity scale midpoints, polarity, and “don’t know” options to SFT. Results indicate that 7- and 9-point bipolar scales without a “don’t know” option slightly outperform all other scales on some psychometric tests, particularly those related to formal properties of the scales and factorial validity, but not on psychometric tests assessing survey environment or convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: Since its foundation in 1974, Social Indicators Research has become the leading journal on problems related to the measurement of all aspects of the quality of life. The journal continues to publish results of research on all aspects of the quality of life and includes studies that reflect developments in the field. It devotes special attention to studies on such topics as sustainability of quality of life, sustainable development, and the relationship between quality of life and sustainability. The topics represented in the journal cover and involve a variety of segmentations, such as social groups, spatial and temporal coordinates, population composition, and life domains. The journal presents empirical, philosophical and methodological studies that cover the entire spectrum of society and are devoted to giving evidences through indicators. It considers indicators in their different typologies, and gives special attention to indicators that are able to meet the need of understanding social realities and phenomena that are increasingly more complex, interrelated, interacted and dynamical. In addition, it presents studies aimed at defining new approaches in constructing indicators.
期刊最新文献
How to Assess Livelihoods? Critical Reflections on the Use of Common Indicators to Capture Socioeconomic Outcomes for Ecological Restoration workers in South Africa Quantifying Turbulence: Introducing a Multi-crises Impact Index for Lebanon A Machine Learning Approach to Well-Being in Late Childhood and Early Adolescence: The Children’s Worlds Data Case Where You Sit Is Where You Stand: Perceived (In)Equality and Demand for Democracy in Africa An Evaluation of the Impact of the Pension System on Income Inequality: USA, UK, Netherlands, Italy and Türkiye
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1