Keywords
Likert scale
measurement invariance
confirmatory factor analysis
validity
How to Cite
Abstract
The Likert scale has become a popular method of assessment within the social sciences; however, there is no consensus on which response option is better (five-point or seven-point). The present research attempted to compare the psychometric properties of the two Likert response options, using a life satisfaction instrument. A quantitative and cross-sectional study was carried out by analyzing measurement invariance. Based on two non-probabilistic samples of young people from five Spanish-speaking countries (n1= 706, n2= 911), a multigroup (country and gender) confirmatory factor analysis was performed, considering configural, metric, scalar and strict invariance. Based on previous studies and the results obtained, the findings suggest that the Likert-5 scale obtained more favorable results. Therefore, the instrument was invariant when comparing countries; nonetheless, with respect to gender, some favorable indicators were obtained to support the measurement invariance of the instrument.
References
Adcock, R., & Collier, D. (2001). Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research. American Political Science Review, 95(3), 529-546. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055401003100
Aiken, L. R. (2003). Test psicológicos y evaluación. Peason Prentice Hall.
Anjaria, K. (2022). Knowledge Derivation from Likert Scale Using Z-numbers. Information Sciences, 590, 234-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2022.01.024
Ariely, G., & Davidov, E. (2012). Assessment of Measurement Equivalence with Cross-National and Longitudinal Surveys in Political Science. European Political Science, 11(3), 363-377. https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2011.11
Arrindell, W. A., Checa, I., Espejo, B., Chen, I.-H., Carrozzino, D., Vu-Bich, P., Dambach, H., & Vagos, P. (2022). Measurement Invariance and Construct Validity of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) in Community Volunteers in Vietnam. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(6), 3460. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063460
Asociación Americana de Psicología. (APA, 2010). Diccionario conciso de psicología. Manual Moderno.
American Psychological Association. (APA, 2015). APA Dictionary of Psychology (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association.
Berrios-Riquelme, J., Pascual-Soler, M., Frias-Navarro, D., & Maluenda-Albornoz, J. (2021). Psychometric Properties and Factorial Invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Latino Immigrants in Chile, Spain, and United States. Terapia Psicológica, 39(2), 199-218. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-48082021000200199
Bisquerra, R. y Pérez-Escoda, N. (2015). ¿Pueden las escalas Likert aumentar en sensibilidad? REIRE: Revista d’innovació i Recerca En Educació, 8(2), 129-147. https://doi.org/10.1344/reire2015.8.2828
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2004). The Concept of Validity. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061-1071. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1061
Bryman, A. (2003). Quantity and Quality in Social Research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203410028
Byrne, B. (2008). Testing for Multigroup Equivalence of a Measuring Instrument: A Walk Through the Process. Psicothema, 20(4), 872-882. https://www.psicothema.com/pdf/3569.pdf
Carifio, J., & Perla, R. (2008). Resolving the 50-Year Debate Around Using and Misusing Likert Scales. Medical Education, 42(12), 1150-1152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03172.x
Casas, F., Sarriera, J. C., Abs, D., Coenders, G., Alfaro, J., Saforcada, E., & Tonon, G. (2012). Subjective Indicators of Personal Well-Being among Adolescents. Performance and Results for Different Scales in Latin-Language Speaking Countries: A Contribution to the International Debate. Child Indicators Research, 5(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-011-9119-1
Chang, L. (1994). A Psychometric Evaluation of 4-Point and 6-Point Likert-Type Scales in Relation to Reliability and Validity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18(3), 205-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169401800302
Checa, I., Perales, J., & Espejo, B. (2019). Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale by Gender, Age, Marital Status and Educational Level. Quality of Life Research, 28(4), 963-968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2066-2
Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement Invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
Chen, X., Yu, Q., Yu, F., Huang, Y., & Zhang, L. (2019). Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Version of the Snizek-Revised Hall’s Professionalism Inventory Scale. Journal of International Medical Research, 47(3), 1154-1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060518817401
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233-255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (2019). Constructing Validity: New Developments in Creating Objective Measuring Instruments. Psychological Assessment, 31(12), 1412-1427. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000626
Colman, A. M., Norris, C. E., & Preston, C. C. (1997). Comparing Rating Scales of Different Lengths: Equivalence of Scores from 5-Point and 7-Point Scales. Psychological Reports, 80(2), 355-362. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1997.80.2.355
Cox III, E. P. (1980). The Optimal Number of Response Alternatives for a Scale: A Review. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 407. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150495
Croasmun, J. T., & Ostrom, L. (2011). Using Likert-Type Scales in the Social Sciences. Journal of Adult Education, 40(1), 19-22. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ961998.pdf
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct Validity in Psychological Tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281-302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
Cummins, R. A. (1997). The Directory of Instruments to Measure Quality of Life and Cognate Areas of Study (4th ed.). Deakin University.
Cummins, R. A., & Gullone, E. (2000). Why We Should Not Use 5-Point Likert Scales: The Case for Subjective Quality of Life Measurement [conference]. Proceedings, Second International Conference on Quality of Life in Cities. National University of Singapore.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Dimitrova, R., & Domínguez Espinosa, A. del C. (2015). Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Argentina, Mexico and Nicaragua. Social Inquiry into Well-Being, 1(1), 32. https://ri.ibero.mx/handle/ibero/1063
Dolnicar, S., Grün, B., Leisch, F., & Rossiter, J. R. (2011, feb. 8). Three Good Reasons NOT to Use Five and Seven Point Likert Items [conference]. 21st CAUTHE National Conference. Adelaide, Australia.
Emerson, S. D., Guhn, M., & Gadermann, A. M. (2017). Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale: Reviewing Three Decades of Research. Quality of Life Research, 26(9), 2251-2264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1552-2
Escobar-Pérez, J. y Cuervo-Martínez, A. (2008). Validez de contenido y juicio de expertos: Una aproximación a su utilización. Avances en Medición, 6, 27-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2018.08.008
Esnaola, I., Benito, M., Antonio-Agirre, I., Freeman, J., & Sarasa, M. (2017). Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) by Country, Gender and Age. Psicothema, 29(4), 596-601. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.394
Espejo, B., Martín-Carbonell, M., Checa, I., Paternina, Y., Fernández-Daza, M., Higuita, J. D., Albarracín, A., & Cerquera, A. (2022). Psychometric Properties of the Diener Satisfaction With Life Scale With Five Response Options Applied to the Colombian Population. Frontiers in Public Health, 9, 767534. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.767534
Field, A. (2018). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. Sage Publications Ltd.
Finstad, K. (2010). Response Interpolation and Scale Sensitivity: Evidence Against 5-Point Scales. Usability Metric for User Experience, 5(3), 104-110. http://uxpajournal.org/response-interpolation-and-scale-sensitivity-evidence-against-5-point-scales/
Garwood, J. (2006). Likert Scale. In V. Jupp, The SAGE Dictionary of Social Research Methods (p. 161). SAGE Publications.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis (7a ed.). Pearson Prentice-Hall.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE.
Hancock, G. R., & Klockars, A. J. (1991). The Effect of Scale Manipulations on Validity: Targeting Frequency Rating Scales for Anticipated Performance Levels. Applied Ergonomics, 22(3), 147-154. https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/applied-ergonomics/vol/22/issue/3
Hartley, J. (2014). Some Thoughts on Likert-Type Scales. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(1), 83-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70040-7
Heo, C. Y., Kim, B., Park, K., & Back, R. M. (2022). A Comparison of Best-Worst Scaling and Likert Scale Methods on Peer-to-Peer Accommodation Attributes. Journal of Business Research, 148, 368-377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.064
Hernández, R., Fernández, C. y Baptista, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación. McGraw-Hill Interamericana.
Hittner, J. B., Swickert, R., Silver, C. N., Hevesi, K., & Kövi, Z. (2018). Examining the Cross-National Measurement Invariance of the Extended Satisfaction with Life Scale in the United States and Hungary. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 13(3), 527-544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-017-9542-7
Horn, J. L., & Mcardle, J. J. (1992). A Practical and Theoretical Guide to Measurement Invariance in Aging Research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610739208253916
Hultell, D., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2008). A Psychometric Evaluation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in a Swedish Nationwide Sample of University Students. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(5), 1070-1079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.030
Jang, S., Kim, E. S., Cao, C., Allen, T. D., Cooper, C. L., Lapierre, L. M., O’Driscoll, M. P., Sanchez, J. I., Spector, P. E., Poelmans, S. A. Y., Abarca, N., Alexandrova, M., Antoniou, A.-S., Beham, B., Brough, P., Carikci, I., Ferreiro, P., Fraile, G., Geurts, S., … Woo, J.-M. (2017). Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale Across 26 Countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 48(4), 560-576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117697844
Jovanović, V., & Brdar, I. (2018). The Cross-National Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in A Sample of Undergraduate Students. Personality and Individual Differences, 128, 7-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.02.010
Jovanović, V., Rudnev, M., Arslan, G., Buzea, C., Dimitrova, R., Góngora, V., Guse, T., Ho, R. T. H., Iqbal, N., Jámbori, S., Jhang, F.-H., Kaniušonytė, G., Li, J., Lim, Y.-J., Lodi, E., Mannerström, R., Marcionetti, J., Neto, F., Osin, E., … Žukauskienė, R. (2022). The Satisfaction with Life Scale in Adolescent Samples: Measurement Invariance across 24 Countries and Regions, Age, and Gender. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 17(4), 2139-2161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-021-10024-w
Kerlinger, F. N. y Lee, H. B. (2002). Investigación del comportamiento. McGraw-Hill Interamericana.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
Lazić, A., & Purić, D. (22-24 de septiembre de 2022). Measurement Challenges in Multi-Site Projects: Translation and Adaptation of Psychological Instruments [videoconference]. ABRIR Workshop Series “Increased Representation: A Vision for Inclusive Big-team Science”. Universidad de Sonora. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/28HMP
LeBel, E. P., Berger, D., Campbell, L., & Loving, T. (2017). Falsifiability is not optional. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(2), 254-261https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000106
Lewis, J. R., & Erdinç, O. (2017). User Experience Rating Scales with 7,11, or 101 Points: Does It Matter? Journal of Usability Studies, 12(2), 73-91. http://uxpajournal.org/user-experience-rating-scales-points/
Li, Q. (2013). A Novel Likert Scale Based on Fuzzy Sets Theory. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(5), 1609-1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.09.015
Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22(140), 55-55.
Martell Muñoz, J., García Cadena, C. H., Daniel-González, L., Sánchez Miranda, P. y Mendoza Martínez, A. (2018). Estructura factorial de la escala de satisfacción con la vida y validez convergente con la escala de calidad de vida en preparatorianos mexicanos. Revista de Psicología y Ciencias del Comportamiento de la Unidad Académica de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, 9(2), 30-45. https://doi.org/10.29365/rpcc.20181207-70
Mikulic, I. M., Crespi, M. y Caballero, R. Y. (2019). Escala de satisfacción con la vida (SWLS): estudio de las propiedades psicométricas en adultos de Buenos Aires. Anuario de Investigaciones, 51, 395-402. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=369163433043
Norman, G. (2016). Is Psychometrics Science? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 21(4), 731-734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-016-9705-6
Oishi, S. (2006). The Concept of Life Satisfaction Across Cultures: An IRT Analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.02.002
Padrós, F., Gutiérrez, C. Y. y Medina, M. A. (2015). Propiedades Psicométricas de la escala de satisfacción con la vida (SWLS) de Diener en población de Michoacán (México). Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 33(2), 223-232. https://doi.org/10.12804/apl33.02.2015.04
Park, N., Peterson, C., & Ruch, W. (2009). Orientations to Happiness and Life Satisfaction in Twenty-Seven Nations. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(4), 273-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760902933690
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5(2), 164-172. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.5.2.164
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2008). The Satisfaction With Life Scale and the Emerging Construct of Life Satisfaction. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(2), 137-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760701756946
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2009). Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. In E. Diener (Ed.), Assessing Well-Being (Vol. 39, pp. 101-117). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2354-4_5
Preston, C. C. & Colman, A. M. (2000). Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences. Acta Psychologica, 104(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00050-5
Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement Invariance Conventions and Reporting: The State of the Art and Future Directions for Psychological Research. Developmental Review, 41, 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
Ruiz, M. A., Pardo, A. y San Martín, R. (2010). Modelo de ecuaciones estructurales. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 34-45. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=77812441004
Sancho, P., Caycho-Rodríguez, T., Ventura-León, J., Tomás, J. M., & Reyes-Bossio, M. (2019). Does the Spanish Version of the SWLS Measure the Same in Spain and Peru? Revista Española de Geriatría y Gerontología, 54(6), 329-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regg.2019.04.003
Sapsford, R. (2006). Validity of Measurement. In The SAGE Dictionary of Social Research Methods (pp. 314-315). SAGE Publications, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020116.n217
Schnettler, B., Miranda-Zapata, E., Lobos, G., del Carmen Lapo, M., Adasme-Berríos, C., & Hueche, C. (2017). Measurement Invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Chilean and Ecuadorian Older Adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 110, 96-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.036
Schnettler, B., Miranda-Zapata, E., Sánchez, M., Orellana, L., Lobos, G., Adasme-Berríos, C., Sepúlveda, J., & Hueche, C. (2021). Cross-Cultural Measurement Invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Chilean and Spanish University Students. Suma Psicológica, 28(1). https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n2.8
Simms, L. J., Zelazny, K., Williams, T. F., & Bernstein, L. (2019). Does the Number of Response Options Matter? Psychometric Perspectives Using Personality Questionnaire Data. Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 557-566. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000648
Singh, D. P., Ahmed, N., & Gupta, N. (2021). Business Research Method and Project Work. SBPD Publications.
Strauss, M. E., & Smith, G. T. (2009). Construct Validity: Advances in Theory and Methodology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.032408.153639
Taherdoost, H. (2019). What Is the Best Response Scale for Survey and Questionnaire Design; Review of Different Lengths of Rating Scale / Attitude Scale / Likert Scale. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, 8(1), 1-10. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3588604
Tucker, K. L., Ozer, D. J., Lyubomirsky, S., & Boehm, J. K. (2006). Testing for Measurement Invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale: A Comparison of Russians and North Americans. Social Indicators Research, 78(2), 341-360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-1037-5
Valdés, M. A., García, F. I., Torres, G. M., Urías, M., & Grijalva, C. S. (2019). Medición en investigación educativa con apoyo del SPSS y el AMOS. Clave Editorial.
Veenhoven, R. (2015). The Overall Satisfaction with Life: Subjective Approaches (1). En W. Glatzer, L. Camfield, V. Møller y M. Rojas (Eds.), Global Handbook of Quality of Life (pp. 207-238). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9178-6_9
Vittersø, J., Biswas-Diener, R., & Diener, E. (2005). The Divergent Meanings of Life Satisfaction: Item Response Modeling of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Greenland and Norway. Social Indicators Research, 74(2), 327-348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-4644-7
Whisman, M. A., & Judd, C. M. (2016). A Cross-National Analysis of Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, 28(2), 239-244. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000181
Zeller, R. A. (2005). Measurement Error, Issues and Solutions. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Social Measurement (pp. 665-676). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-369398-5/00109-2
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023