Introduction
Persuasion, communication course 333 at Old Dominion University requires that we examine two of the three attitude scales that we have reviewed. For this blog post I will examine the Semantic Differential and Likert scales. The semantic differential scale is used to measure a range of emotions whereas the Likert scale focus on the participants agreement or disagreement with the posted question. Each scale will be examined below.
Critical Assessment
Likert scales can be a useful tool for measuring attitudes, it allows for a measurable analysis of individual opinions. The benefits of using the Likert scale include easy interpretation of responses on a scale of agree to disagree. This type of data collection can be beneficial in situations where you want to understand people's opinions, feelings, or preferences on a particular topic. For example, a customer satisfaction survey can utilize the Likert scale to measure the level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with a product or service.
The Semantic Differential scale is a valuable tool for measuring attitudes as it allows for an analysis of personal perceptions such as emotions or opinions. It works by asking respondents to rate an object, concept, or event on a series such as good-bad, happy-sad, etc. The Semantic Differential scale can be beneficial in a variety of settings, such as market research, and psychology. For example, in market research, the scale can be used to understand consumer attitudes towards a product. In psychology, the scale can be used to assess attitudes towards mental health, and self-esteem to name a few.
Fair Criticism
Personally, my main criticism of the Likert scale is its vulnerability to response biases, which can lead to inaccurate and unreliable results. Additionally, my biggest criticism of the semantic differential scale is that the interpretation of the results can be subjective, as it relies heavily on the individual's personal interpretation of the scale's descriptions.
Theoretical Application
According, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), people can process persuasive messages through a central or peripheral route. (Gass et. al, p. 36-37). The central route is characterized by an elevated level of elaboration, where people critically evaluate the message, while the peripheral route is characterized by a low level of elaboration, where people process the message superficially. (Gass et. al, p. 36-38).
When using the Likert scale, individuals with high motivation and ability are more likely to engage in central processing, which involves careful consideration of the message content. On the other hand, individuals with low motivation and ability are more likely to engage in peripheral processing, which involves relying on cues other than the message itself to make judgments.
Looking at the semantic differential scale, the ELM suggests that the level of engagement when managing a message can affect their connotative meaning of the message. (Gass et. al, p. 45). For example, if people engage in a high level of understanding when processing a message about a particular product, they may have a more positive association of that product compared to if they processed the message casually.
The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) suggests that people's attitudes towards a behavior and their perceived social pressure to perform or not perform a behavior, determine their behavioral intention, which then predicts their actual behavior. (Gass et. al, p. 50-51). The ELM and TRA provide theoretical frameworks for understanding how the scores on the Likert scale and semantic differential scale relate to behavior and attitude. For example, if people have a positive connotative meaning of exercising, they may have a more cheerful outlook towards exercising and be more likely to engage in that behavior.
Reflection
After reviewing the content provided and reflecting on what I have learned, I now have a better appreciation of the scales and their uses. I noticed that they could work together or separate. Each have flaws based on perceptions, the understanding level on a topic can make the difference in how someone answers the questions posed. Going forward I intend to pay more attention to the information presented and make sure I fully understand what the topic is about and for what the information is to be used. Answering honestly is important in this type of data collection and ensuring each person has the full understanding of the topic to be able to answer honestly would be my main goal if I were to create these types of scales for future research.
References
Gass Robert H., Seiter John S. Persuasion social influence and compliance gaining. 2014. Fifth Edition. Pearson. 2023.
Comments