The purpose of this blog is to fulfill an assignment for my Persuasion course, a Communication Theory requirement at Old Dominion University. In this post, I will be analyzing two different attitude scales that we learned about in Chapter 3: Attitudes and Consistency of our Persuasion textbook. The two attitude scales I have chosen to analyze are the Likert Scale and the Visually Oriented Scale.
According to Robert H. Gass and John S. Seiter, a Likert scale consists of a series of statements about some attitude object, followed by a continuum of choices ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. Named after Rensus Likert, this ‘equal appearing interval’ scale is still widely used today (p. 45). An example of this kind of scale is as follows:
One of the biggest benefits of the scale in measuring attitudes, I believe, is its simple construction. This kind of scale is relatively easy to create and very easy to distribute. The Likert scale can also be used in a wide range of situations and fields. The scale has been widely accepted and utilized in the world of academia, as well as in politics and the workforce (Gass 2014 p.45). A perfect time to use this form of scale would be if you were conducting a political spectrum test on a group of people. Say, hypothetically, you were testing a group of 250 people. The group consists of all forms of race, ethnicity, gender identity and sexual orientation, and you, the individual conducting the test, want to know where everyone lands on the political spectrum. Using this scale would be most beneficial for you because it is easy to make, easy to tailor to your specific questions and scaling, and easy to distribute to the crowd of people. It would also be most beneficial because you can retrieve the best results from this form of scale by literally counting out the results and comparing them to what you have already preset as the control or base.
I only have one criticism for the Likert Attitude Scale. One thing about this attitude-measuring device would be that there is always going to be room for error and not everyone is going to answer honestly. Simply put, some test takers, knowing their answers will be made public anonymously, want to exhibit acceptable answers to appear within the normal range of conduct, also known as social desirability bias (Gass 2014 p. 46). They’ll skew their answers to make them look good. I expect this to happen especially in this scenario, giving the sensitive nature of politics in this day in age. You simply will not get the true picture of the political nature of this group of people; however, you will get a rough idea.
Another type of scale that measures attitude is known as a Visually Oriented Scale. Basically, this kind of scale gives the participant a range of visuals to basically ‘rate’ how they feel using the visuals as a reference for those feelings. A perfect example of this would if someone was being admitted to an emergency room and the nurse gives them a sheet with images depicting faces experiencing different levels of pain. The ER uses this scale to gather data on how much pain the patient is truly experiencing in whatever injury or sickness they are dealing with (I have first-hand experience in this, I have taken one of these tests during my visit to the ER)
My only criticism for the Visually Oriented Scale would be that sometimes the person being tested by using this scale may misinterpret the image. Sometimes, the images used in these tests are not always straightforward. For example, if the image of a smiley face icon in excruciating pain looks like it is just sad/crying, the person trying to show how much pain they're in may get confused. This could lead to frustration and the unwell being of the individual. When creating visually oriented scales, the creator needs to be conscious of what imagery they are using to emphasize certain emotions and feelings. In reference to the ER example, the nurses need the patient to accurately self-assess their pain and condition so that they can relay the conditions to the doctor as accurately as possible.
In reflection, these two scales are both very useful. Testing attitudes toward something in an individual or a group can be tricky. However, by utilizing these two methods of scaling, persuaders can remain confident that they will get accurate readings on the feelings and emotions of their constituents.
References:
Gass, R. H., Seiter, J. S., & R.E, P. (2017). In Persuasion: Social influence and compliance gaining (pp. 44–47). essay, Routledge.
Comentários