2010
DOI: 10.1080/16843703.2010.11673220
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some Uses of Rasch Models Parameters in Customer Satisfaction Data Analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Because an automaker's decision to choose a particular supplier could be influenced by the automaker's relationships with other suppliers, we used a random-intercept model to control for potential correlations between the automaker's supplier choices. This procedure permits us to use all the information included in the questionnaire to measure effective variables and then to investigate relations with covariates (Pagani and Zanarotti, 2010). The likelihood-ratio test output confirms that adding random slope bring much significant improvement (p Ͻ 0.01).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Because an automaker's decision to choose a particular supplier could be influenced by the automaker's relationships with other suppliers, we used a random-intercept model to control for potential correlations between the automaker's supplier choices. This procedure permits us to use all the information included in the questionnaire to measure effective variables and then to investigate relations with covariates (Pagani and Zanarotti, 2010). The likelihood-ratio test output confirms that adding random slope bring much significant improvement (p Ͻ 0.01).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…In this paragraph we use the Rasch Analysis in the educational services evaluation context (King and Bond 2003;De Battisti et al 2005;Bacci 2006;Pagani and Zanarotti 2010), to detect the appropriate ordinal response category structures among those considered. First of all, a preliminary data analysis has been performed in order to assess the effects of the 4-and 10-point response scales in disjoint (standard questionnaire and experimental questionnaire version B) and joint form (experimental questionnaire version A).…”
Section: Rasch Analysis Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• < 0.67:-poor reliability • 0.67-0.80:-fair reliability • 0.81-0.90:-good reliability • 0.91-0.94:-very good reliability • > 0.94:-excellent reliability Moreover, the reliability and consistency achieved for measures should not be taken from the KR-20 values alone, but they also need to be deliberated by the person separation index (index of internal consistency) (Andrich, 1988;Bond & Fox, 2007;Schumacker & Smith Jr., 2007;Linacre, 2008;Fisher et al, 2010;Pagani & Zanarotti, 2010). Bond and Fox (2007); and Fisher et al (2010), further suggested that the person separation index and the KR-20 value should be used to portray in the logit scale to substantiate the reliability and consistency in accordance with the RMT understanding of person's replicability and item placements, respectively.…”
Section: Reliability and Consistency Of The Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%