1. ATTITUDE SCALES

2. CONCEPT OF ATTITUDE
Attitudes are individual mental processes which
determine both the actual and potential responses
of each person in a social world. Since an attitude is
always directed toward some object it may be
defined as “the state of mind of the individual
toward a value.”

3. COMPONENTS OF ATTITUDE
There are three main components of attitudes:
A Cognitive Component
An Affective Component
A Behavioral Component

4. GENERAL PROCEDURE IN ATTITUDE SCALING
The most commonly used approach for the
measurement of attitude is the Self- Report,
where a person is asked directly how he feels
about an object.
Other methods are observation of behavior,
indirect techniques such as word– association
tests, sentence-completion tests, story
telling, performance of ‘objective’ tasks and
physiological reactions.

5. Process of Self – Report Method
• One should assemble a set of items or
statements related to the subject of enquiry.
From this pool of items, a final choice of items
is to be made for inclusion in the scale.
• Choose the items or statements for final scale
(Use of exploratory study or Thurstone Scale).
• Finally, scale should be tested in regard to its
reliability and validity.

6. A Classification of Scaling Techniques
Likert
Semantic
Differential
Stapel
Scaling Techniques
Noncomparative
Scales
Comparative
Scales
Paired
Comparison
Rank
Order
Constant
Sum
Q-Sort and
Other
Procedures
Continuous
Rating Scales
Itemized
Rating
Scales

7. SELECTED ATTITUDE SCALES
• Paired-comparison Scale
• Thurstone Scale
• The Summated rating Scale (Likert Scale)
• Scalogram Analysis
• Semantic Differential
• Stapel

8. A Comparison of Scaling Techniques
• Comparative scales involve the direct comparison of stimulus
objects. Comparative scale data must be interpreted in
relative terms and have only ordinal or rank order properties.
• In noncomparative scales, each object is scaled
independently of the others in the stimulus set. The resulting
data are generally assumed to be interval or ratio scaled.

9. Relative Advantages of Comparative Scales
• Small differences between stimulus objects can be detected.
• Same known reference points for all respondents.
• Easily understood and can be applied.
• Involve fewer theoretical assumptions.
• Tend to reduce halo or carryover effects from one judgment
to another.

10. Relative Disadvantages of Comparative Scales
• Ordinal nature of the data
• Inability to generalize beyond the stimulus objects scaled.

11. Paired Comparison Scaling
• A respondent is presented with two objects and asked to
select one according to some criterion.
• The data obtained are ordinal in nature.
• Paired comparison scaling is the most widely used
comparative scaling technique.
• With n brands, [n(n - 1) /2] paired comparisons are required
• Under the assumption of transitivity, it is possible to convert
paired comparison data to a rank order.

12. The Likert Scale (Summated Ratings Scale)
• A multiple item rating scale in which the degree of an attribute
possessed by an object is determined by asking respondents to
agree or disagree with a series of positive and/or negative
statements describing the object.
• Example:
Totally
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree
Totally
agree
a) Shopping takes much longer on the Internet [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) It is a good thing that Saudi consumers have
the opportunity to buy products through the [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Buying products over the Internet is not a
sensible thing to do [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Attitude toward buying from the Internet

13. Characteristics of the Likert Scale
• The following procedure is used to analyze data from Likert
scales:
1. First, weights are assigned to the responses options, e.g. Totally
agree=1, Agree=2, etc
2. Then negatively-worded statements are reverse-coded (or
reverse scored). E.g. a score of 2 for a negatively-worded
statement with a 5-point response options is equivalent to a score
of 4 on an equivalent positive statement.
3. Next, scores are summed across statements to arrive at a total (or
summated) score.
4. Each respondent’s score can then be compared with the mean
score or the scores of other respondents to determine his level of
attitude, loyalty, or other construct that is being measured
• Note that the response for each individual statement is expressed
on a category scale.

14. Guttman Scale
This technique assesses the extent of the subject’s
agreement with items, where the items are meant
to represent a continuum.For example, one might
ask these questions:
1. Do you drink alcohol?
2. Do you smoke marijuana?
3. Do you use cocaine?
One might anticipate that all persons who answer
“yes” to #3 would also answer “yes” to #1 and #2,
and so forth.

15. Guttman Scale (Continued)
 This technique can be used to ask many
questions in a short amount of space (mailed
survey) or time (telephone survey).
 The technique is intuitively appealing to most
persons.
 The technique provides continuous-level and
ranked data.
 The items have to form a continuum that is
accepted by respondents and the community
of scholars.

16. Semantic Differential Scale
• A rating scale in which bipolar adjectives are placed at both
ends (or poles) of the scale, and response options are
expressed as “semantic” space.
Example:
Please rate car model A on each of the following dimensions:
Durable ---:-X-:---:---:---:---:--- Not durable
Low fuel consumption ---:---:---:---:---:-X-:--- High fuel consumption
Characteristics
1. The scale has properties of an interval scale.
2. Sometimes descriptive phrases are used instead of bipolar
adjectives, especially when it is difficult to get adjectives that
are exact opposites
3. It is often used to construct an image profile.

17. Stapel Scale
• A simplified version of the semantic differential scale in which a single
adjective or descriptive phrase is used instead of bipolar adjectives.
Characteristics
1. The scale measures both the direction and intensity of the attribute
simultaneously.
2. It has properties similar to the semantic differential.
Example:
Model A
-3 -2 -1 Durable Car 1 2 3
-3 -2 -1 Good Fuel Conaumption 1 2 3

18. Rank Order Scaling
• Respondents are presented with several objects simultaneously
and asked to order or rank them according to some criterion.
• It is possible that the respondent may dislike the brand ranked
1 in an absolute sense.
• Further more, rank order scaling also results in ordinal data.
• Only (n - 1) scaling decisions need be made in rank order
scaling.

19. Preference for Toothpaste Brands
Using Rank Order Scaling
Instructions: Rank the various brands of toothpaste in order of
preference. Begin by picking out the one brand that you like
most and assign it a number 1. Then find the second most
preferred brand and assign it a number 2. Continue this
procedure until you have ranked all the brands of toothpaste in
order of preference. The least preferred brand should be
assigned a rank of 10.
No two brands should receive the same rank number.
The criterion of preference is entirely up to you. There is no
right or wrong answer. Just try to be consistent.

20. Brand Rank Order
1. Crest _________
2. Colgate _________
3. Aim _________
4. Gleem _________
5. Macleans _________
6. Ultra Brite _________
7. Close Up _________
8. Pepsodent _________
9. Plus White _________
10. Stripe _________
Preference for Toothpaste Brands
Using Rank Order Scaling
Form

21. Constant-Sum Scale
• A rating scale in which respondents divide a constant sum among
different attributes of an object (usually to indicate the relative
importance of each attribute).
• Assumed to have ratio level properties.
Example: Divide 100 points among the following dimensions to
indicate their level of importance to you when you purchase a
car:
Durability
Fuel Consumption
Total 100

22. LIMITATIONS OF ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT
• Criticised on account of their inability to
predict behavior.
• Normally tend to overlook the immediate
environment of the consumers.
• Relationship between attitudes and buying
behavior still continues to be indistinct.