Javascript must be enabled to continue!
A Comparison of Six Overall Evaluation Rating Scales
View through CrossRef
A study was conducted with a random sample of 131 college students to determine whether different overall evaluation rating scales would produce different results. Six different rating scales were used to measure four stimuli (their college, a core course, the college cafeteria, and the college library). The six overall evaluation rating scales were: an "overall how would you rate" rating scale, a "likely to recommend to a friend" rating scale, a "compared to the ideal" rating scale," a "how often, if at all, do you regret having chosen/taken/used" scale, a "compared to what you expected" rating scale," and an "overall satisfaction" rating scale. The results indicate that, in general, that the "compared to ideal" and "expectations" scales generally produce more negative evaluations while the "overall rating" and "regret" scales produce more positive evaluations. Thus, a researcher might inadvertently bias a study towards the negative side by phrasing the question in terms of expectations ("Overall, compared to what you expected, how would you rate___?") or as compared to the ideal ("Compared to the ideal___, how would you rate___?"). On the other hand, phrasing the question in terms of an overall rating ("Overall, how would you rate___?") will produce more positive overall evaluations.
Title: A Comparison of Six Overall Evaluation Rating Scales
Description:
A study was conducted with a random sample of 131 college students to determine whether different overall evaluation rating scales would produce different results.
Six different rating scales were used to measure four stimuli (their college, a core course, the college cafeteria, and the college library).
The six overall evaluation rating scales were: an "overall how would you rate" rating scale, a "likely to recommend to a friend" rating scale, a "compared to the ideal" rating scale," a "how often, if at all, do you regret having chosen/taken/used" scale, a "compared to what you expected" rating scale," and an "overall satisfaction" rating scale.
The results indicate that, in general, that the "compared to ideal" and "expectations" scales generally produce more negative evaluations while the "overall rating" and "regret" scales produce more positive evaluations.
Thus, a researcher might inadvertently bias a study towards the negative side by phrasing the question in terms of expectations ("Overall, compared to what you expected, how would you rate___?") or as compared to the ideal ("Compared to the ideal___, how would you rate___?").
On the other hand, phrasing the question in terms of an overall rating ("Overall, how would you rate___?") will produce more positive overall evaluations.
Related Results
Assessing energy rating premiums in the performance of green office buildings in Australia
Assessing energy rating premiums in the performance of green office buildings in Australia
Purpose– Green office buildings have recently taken on increased significance in institutional property portfolios in Australia and globally. The key issue from an institutional in...
Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Abstract
The rapid growth of open access publishing (OAP) has significantly improved the accessibility and dissemination of scientific knowledge. However, this expansion has also c...
Arm's Length Method for Comparing Rating Scales
Arm's Length Method for Comparing Rating Scales
Investors are being encouraged after the global crisis to reduce their dependence on the largest credit rating agencies for risk assessments of companies and securities. Comparing ...
PENGARUH PENGUMUMAN PERUBAHAN PERINGKAT OBLIGASI TERHADAP PERILAKU INVESTOR PADA PERUSAHAAN ASING DAN DOMESTIK
PENGARUH PENGUMUMAN PERUBAHAN PERINGKAT OBLIGASI TERHADAP PERILAKU INVESTOR PADA PERUSAHAAN ASING DAN DOMESTIK
The objective of this research is to examine differences behavior investors to bond rating changes in foreign and domestic companies. The event date is the time when PT Pefindo as...
Maqas¯ . id Realisation in Islamic Finance: Components of Framework for Measurement Index
Maqas¯ . id Realisation in Islamic Finance: Components of Framework for Measurement Index
While Islamic finance has developed impressively across the globe, efforts have been initiated to measure the growth, its socio-economic impact and realizing the objectives for whi...
Estimating Sovereign Credit Rating: Is Kuwait Overrated? Musaed S. AlAli
Estimating Sovereign Credit Rating: Is Kuwait Overrated? Musaed S. AlAli
Despite all the criticism surrounding the reliability of credit rating agencies’ rating systems, these agencies' ratings still play an essential role in determining the cost of fun...
Understanding of Requirements Engineering using The Three Dimensions of Requirements Engineering Method in Platform Development
Understanding of Requirements Engineering using The Three Dimensions of Requirements Engineering Method in Platform Development
Requirements engineering is a critical activity in a development system project, the increasing need for complexity of software development and the heterogeneity of stakeholders in...
PENGARUH RATING PENILAIAN DAN ULASAN ONLINE TERHADAP KEPERCAYAAN KONSUMEN PADA PENGGUNAAN TOKO ONLINE SHOPEE
PENGARUH RATING PENILAIAN DAN ULASAN ONLINE TERHADAP KEPERCAYAAN KONSUMEN PADA PENGGUNAAN TOKO ONLINE SHOPEE
ABSTRAK Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji pengaruh secara parsial dan simultan pada Rating Penilaian dan Ulasan Online terhadap Kepercayaan Konsumen pada toko online Shopee....

