HIND COLLEGE OF NURSING

Safedabad, Barabanki
SUBJECT- NURSING EDUCATION

ASSIGNMENTS
ON
ITEM ANALYSIS

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY
MR. MUTHU KUMAR MS. SAROJ TIGGA
PROFESSOR M.Sc. NURSING 1ST YEAR
DEP. OF MENTAL HEALTH NURSING HIND COLLEGE OF NURSING

ITEM ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
Item Analysis describes the statistical analyses which allow measurement of the effectiveness of
individual test items. An understanding of the factors which govern effectiveness (and a means
of measuring them) can enable us to create more effective test questions and also regulate and
standardize existing tests. The most popular scale using this approach is like likert scale rating.
MEANING
Item analysis is, each item is evaluated on the basis of how well it discriminates between those
persons whose total score is high and those whose score is low. Item Analysis allows us to
observe the characteristics of a particular question (item) and can be used to ensure that
questions are of an appropriate standard and select items for test inclusion.
LIKERT’S SUMMATED SCALE
Rensis likert was instrumental in developing summated rating scale based on item analysis.
Likert scale is by far the most popular of all measurement scale. It is meant for measuring ordinal
attributes like attitude. It is designed to measure the intensity with which an attitude is expressed.
SOCIAL DISTANCE SCALE
Religious would have would have would live in would have would debar groups marriage as
regular same more speaking from my relationship friends neighbourhood acquaintances
neighbourhood
Christians
Muslims
Anglo-Indians
Parsees
This scale consists of number of statements which expressed either a favourable or unfavourable
attitudes towards the object of study. The respondent is asked to respond to each statement in
terms of 5 degree of agreement (three &seven point scales are also used). A few examples from a
job satisfaction scale developed byBrayfield&Rothe are: Strongly agree undecided disagree
strongly agree disagreemy job is like a hobby to me 5 4 3 2 1i consider my job rather unpleasant
12345
The numbers in the above example indicate the scale values for different degrees of agreement:
“I” indicating the least favourable degree & “t” the most favourable. For positive statements 5 to
1 scores are assigned & for negative statement 1 to 5 scores are assigned. While administrating
these scores are not printed on the instrument; they are later adopted while computing the scores
for respondent. Each person’s response values are summed up to obtain its score. Hence ,this
scale is called “summated” scale.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF LIKERT-TYPE SCALE CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING
STEPS:
1. Compose an item pool of 50 or more statements relevant to the attitude being studied &
expressing either favourable attitude or unfavourable attitude;
2. List the items in a five-point scale: strongly agree,agree, undecided, disagree &strongly
disagree; strongly approve, approve, undecided, disapprove, strongly disapprove.
3. Administer the item pool to a sample of respondents, say 100 or more, who are similar to
those who are going to be studied for the survey; ask them to check one of the five positions in
the scale against each item;
4. Score the responses of each respondent to each item using scale value of 5-12 for a positive
statement and 1-5 for a negative one;
5. Add up the item score to obtain a total score for each respondent, Ex; if there are 150 items in
the item pool, then each respondents total score will range from 150-750;
6. Carry out an item analysis to decide which are the best statements for the final scale; one
approach to item analysis is to calculate correlation co-efficients for each item with the total
score (minus the score for the item in question), and to retain items with highest correlations.
This is known as the internal consistency
METHOD OF ANALYSIS.
Select 20-25 items from among the retained items with the highest correlations or ‘t’ values and
design the final scale. Item in the finaal scale has no scale values such as in the Thurston scale;
all items carry equal weights.
LIKERT’S SCALE VS THURSTONE’S SCALE;
This likert’s scale is lesser laborious than the thurstone’s scale. Likert’s scale requires fewer
items than thurstone scale to reach a given level of reliability since respondents answer each
item; the likert scale is more reliable than the thurst one scaleand also provides a greater volume
of daa does the latter. The likert’s scale makes no pretence at equal appearing intervals, but by
using the internal consistency method of item selection it approachs undimentionability.
ADVANTAGES
likert’s scale has many advantages which account for its popularity. It;s easy and quick to
constract. It is to use this scale. It provides more precise information about a respondents degree
to agreement. It is undimentionali.e, all items measure the same thing. It does not require the use
of judges. It is flexible. The researcher is at a liberty to include as many or as few items in the
scale. It lends itself to ordinal measurements.
DISADVANTAGES
The Weakness Of the likert’s scale is its lack of reproducibility; the same total score may be
obtained in many different ways. Hence, the raw score has little meaning or two or more
identical scores may have totaly different implications. Often, for this reason, the pattern of
responses becomes more interesting than the total score.
CONCLUSION
It is assumed that all items in the likert’s scale have equal weights. This is not necessarily a valid
assumption. Certain statements compared with others may have greater meaning to a person.
Different individuals may possess a given attitude to the same degree, yet they may respond
differently to the item on the scale. Nevertheless, the likert’s scale is highly reliable for rough
ordering of people with regard to a particular attitude.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. C.R. Kothari, “RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, methods and techniques”,(2nd revised
edition), (2004) New age international (p) limited, Page no; 93-95

2. Denise F Polit, Bernaditte P Hungler, “Nursing Research Principles and Methods ”, (6th
edition ), J B Lippincott Company, ( 1995 ), Page No: 315-375.
3. Basavanthappa B T, “Nursing Research”, ( 1st edition ), (1998), Jaypee Publishers,