2017
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-017-0868-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Erratum to: Investigating measurement equivalence of visual analogue scales and Likert-type scales in Internet-based personality questionnaires

Abstract: 1)In the Abstract, the penultimate sentence "The associations were largely identical, with the exception of an increase in explained variance when predicting age from the VAS version of Excitement Seeking (B 10 = 125.1, ΔR 2 = .025)." should be changed to "The associations were largely identical, with the exception of an increase in explained variance when predicting age from the VAS version of Excitement Seeking (B 10 = 1318.95, ΔR 2 = .025)." 2) On page 4, Statistical analyses, at the end of the second parag… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We collected the data online using SoSci Survey (Version 3.1.04; Leiner, 2019) and, if not mentioned otherwise, translated all scales into German using the back-translation procedure as recommended by . Furthermore, if not mentioned otherwise, we measured all items on visual analog scales (0 = "strongly disagree" to 100 = "strongly agree") because they display superior measurement qualities in comparison to traditional Likert-type response scales and, ultimately, provide data on an interval scale (e.g., Reips and Funke, 2008;Rausch and Zehetleitner, 2014;Kuhlmann et al, 2017).…”
Section: Measures and Covariatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We collected the data online using SoSci Survey (Version 3.1.04; Leiner, 2019) and, if not mentioned otherwise, translated all scales into German using the back-translation procedure as recommended by . Furthermore, if not mentioned otherwise, we measured all items on visual analog scales (0 = "strongly disagree" to 100 = "strongly agree") because they display superior measurement qualities in comparison to traditional Likert-type response scales and, ultimately, provide data on an interval scale (e.g., Reips and Funke, 2008;Rausch and Zehetleitner, 2014;Kuhlmann et al, 2017).…”
Section: Measures and Covariatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We collected the data online using SoSci Survey (Version 3.1.04; Leiner, 2019) and, if not mentioned otherwise, translated all scales into German using the back-translation procedure as recommended by Brislin (1970). Furthermore, if not mentioned otherwise, we measured all items on visual analog scales (0 = "strongly disagree" to 100 = "strongly agree") because they display superior measurement qualities in comparison to traditional Likert-type response scales and, ultimately, provide data on an interval scale (e.g., Reips and Funke, 2008;Rausch and Zehetleitner, 2014;Kuhlmann et al, 2017).…”
Section: Measures and Covariatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We conducted all statistical analyses using the statistical environment R (Version 3.4.0; R Development Core Team, 2020) and particularly used the packages lavaan (Version 0.6-1.1141; Rosseel, 2012) and RMediation (Version 1.1.4; Tofighi and MacKinnon, 2011). To determine the proper estimator, we assessed the assumptions of the maximum likelihood estimator: (1) Because we used visual analog scales, the assumption of measurement on an interval-scale level can be considered as fulfilled (e.g., Reips and Funke, 2008;Rausch and Zehetleitner, 2014;Kuhlmann et al, 2017); (2) Furthermore, we tested the respective data for multivariate normality using the Henze-Zirkler test (Henze and Zirkler, 1990), which is provided in the MVN package (Version 5.7; Korkmaz et al, 2014).…”
Section: Analytic Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(yes/no). We used a continuous scale of 0-100 because previous studies have shown that a continuous rating scale is less subject to confounding variables compared to Likert scales, can capture more nuanced responses; in particular, one limitation of Likert scales is that the participants' perceived difference between a "1-hate the product" and "2-somewhat dislike the product" is larger than the participants' perceived difference between "2-somewhat dislike the product" and "3-neutral" [31,32]. We presented each ad in each condition in a random order to avoid bias, presenting only one ad and its corresponding questions on a page at a time.…”
Section: Rating Of Ads With Varying Numbers Of "Likes" and Commentsmentioning
confidence: 99%