V

S
WHO IS THE HERO?
JOHN CARLO L. DIVINA, MSN, RN
Doctorand
Doctor of Science in Nursing major in Gerontology

Main Menu
DEFINITION
PURPOSE
EXAMPLE
DEVELOPING THE TOOL
Back
Track

Credits

DEFINITION
GUTTMAN SCALE
Developed by LOUIS GUTTMAN (1944, 1950)
First used as part of the classic work on the
American Soldier
Guttman scaling is applied to a set of binary
questions answered by a set of subjects.

PURPOSE
To derive a single dimension that can
be used to position both the
questions and the subjects
Used in Social Psychology &
Education

EXAMPLE
PROBLEMS
CHILDR COUNTI
EN
NG

S1

ADDITI
ON

SUBTRACT
ION

MULTIPLICAT DIVISIO
ION
N

S2

S3

S4

S5

TOOL
DEVELOPMENT
Develop the Items

Rate the Items

Develop the Cumulative Scale
Administering the Scale

Guttman Scaling
Start with a large set of items
that you think all reflect the
same construct.
Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20

Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20

Manage resources effectively.

4

Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20

Manage resources effectively.

4
Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20

Manage resources effectively.

4

Manage resources effectively.

4

Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20

Organize the work

when directions are
not specific.
39

Work quickly and

effectively under
Decidepressure
how to
manage multiple
49
tasks.
20

Work quickly and

effectively under
pressure
49
Manage resources effectively.
4
Organize the work
Decide how to
when directions are
manage multiple
not specific.
tasks.
39
20

Work quickly and

effectively under
pressure
49

Organize the work

when directions are
not specific.
39

Decide how to
manage multiple
Work quickly and
tasks.
effectively under
Decidepressure
how to
20
manage multiple
49
tasks.
20
Manage resources effectively.
4
Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20

Work quickly and

effectively under
pressure
49
Organize the work
when directions are
not specific.
39
Organize the work
when directions are
not specific.
39

Organize the work

when directions are
not specific.
39
Organize the work
when directions are
not specific.
Organize
the work
39
when directions are
not specific.
39
Organize the work
when directions are
not specific.
39

Manage resources effectively.

4
Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
Manage resources effectively.20
4
Organize the work
when directions are
Manage resources
effectively.
not specific.
4
39
Work quickly and
effectively under
pressure
49 Manage resources effectively.
4
Work quickly and
effectively under
pressure
Work
49 quickly and
effectively under
pressure
49
Work quickly and
effectively under
pressure
49 Organize the work
when directions are
not specific.
39

Work quickly and

effectively under
pressure
49

Manage resources effectively.

4

Work quickly and

effectively under
pressure
49

Guttman Scaling
Have many judges rate each
statement with respect to whether
it is favorable with respect to the
construct -- a yes/no rating.
s
Ye

e
Sh

et

ely
.
ctiv
ely
ffe
nd
tiv
ee
ec
na
im
t
tio
eff
ge
es
ma
a
c
r
n
for .
ou
in
Ma
t
s
f
o
re
an
.
1
c.
de por t
ks
ge
cifi
as
itu
na
No
pe
et
ult is im
Ma
ts
ipl
a m at
no
ult
2
e
an e wh
m
r
c
a
S
ge
ns
No
cid
na
3
de
ctio
ma
ire
to
nd
w
s
Ye
he
ho
No
nd
w
e
rk
na
cid
wo
tio
De
he
ly
s
ma
et
Ye
ve
or
i
f
No4
iz
t
n
.
c
n
fi
nt
ffe
ga
e o rta
Or
ee
ud po
s
tim
Ye
ltit im
N5o
ge
mu at is
na
a
a
h
M
w
an
s
Sc cide
1
Ye
No
de
3

Ra

g
tin

s
Ye

Guttman Scaling
Lay out a table:
Item
Respondent 2
7
Y
15
Y
3
Y
29
Y
19
Y
32
Y
41
Y
6
Y
14
Y
33
--

Item
7
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
---

Item
5
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
------

Item
3
Y
-Y
Y
-Y
--Y
--

Item
8
Y
Y
---------

Item
...
Y
----------

Guttman Scaling
Lay out a table:
Item
Respondent 2
7
Y
15
Y
3
Y
29
Y
19
Y
32
Y
41
Y
6
Y
14
Y
33
--

When sorted by row and column it

will show whether there is
a cumulative scale.

Item
7
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
---

Item
5
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
------

Item
3
Y
-Y
Y
-Y
--Y
--

Item
8
Y
Y
---------

Item
...
Y
----------

Guttman Scaling
Lay out a table:
Item
Respondent 2
7
Y
15
Y
3
Y
29
Y
19
Y
32
Y
41
Y
6
Y
14
Y
33
--

When sorted by row and column it

will show whether there is
a cumulative scale.

Item
7
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
---

Item
5
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
------

Item
3
Y
-Y
Y
-Y
--Y
--

Item
8
Y
Y
---------

Item
...
Y
----------

Note the exceptions.

INSTRUCTIONS: Place a check next to each

statement you agree with.
_____ I would permit a child of mine to marry an
immigrant.
_____ I believe that this country should allow more
immigrants in.
_____ I would be comfortable if a new immigrant
moved next door to me.
_____ I would be comfortable with new immigrants
moving into my community.
_____ It would be fine with me if new immigrants
moved onto my block.
_____ I would be comfortable if my child dated a new
immigrant.

ANALYSIS
There are several statistical
techniques for examining the table to
find a cumulative scale.
Because there is seldom a perfectly
cumulative scale, we usually have to
test how good it is.
These statistics also estimate a scale
score value for each item.

How Does Respondent Use?

For selected items (the final scale),
they simply answer whether they
agree or not (yes/no).
Since each item has a scale value,
we can add these values.
Total score is the sum of the scale
items respondent agreed to.

DEFINITION
THURSTONE SCALE
First formal technique to measure an
attitude (religion)
Developed by LOUIS LEON THURSTONE
(1928)
Each statement has a numerical value
indicating how favorable or unfavorable it is
judged to be
A mean score is computed, indicating their
attitude.

PURPOSE
Compensates for the limitation of the
Likert scale in that the strength of
the individual items is taken into
account in computing the attitude
score
Can also accommodate neutral
statements

EXAMPLE
SAME SEX MARRIAGE
It should be against the law.
Theres absolutely nothing wrong with it.
Marriage is between a man and a woman.
It should be a sin.
Its perfectly appropriate for two
consenting adults.

TOOL
DEVELOPMENT
Constructing the Scale

Administering the Scale

Scoring

 Step 1. Collect statements on the topic

from people holding a wide range of
attitudes, from extremely favorable to
extremely unfavorable.
attitude toward the use of
marijuana
1. It has its place.
2. Its use by an individual could be the
beginning of a sad situation.
3. It is perfectly healthy; it should be
legalized.

 Step 2. Duplicates and irrelevant

statements are omitted. The rest are
typed on 3/5 cards and given to a
group of people who will serve as
judges.

Step 3. Originally, judges were asked

to sort the statements into eleven
(11) stacks representing the entire
range of attitudes from extremely
unfavorable (1) to extremely
unfavorable (11). The middle stack
is for statements which are neither
favorable nor unfavorable (6).

1. If marijuana is taken safely, its

effect can be quite enjoyable.

2. I think it is horrible and corrupting.

 Step 4. Each statement will have a

numerical rating (1 to 11) from each
judge, based on the stack in which it
was placed. The number or weight
assigned to the statement is the
average of the ratings it received
from the judges.

Statement

If marijuana is taken
safely, its effect can be
quite enjoyable.
I think it is horrible and
corrupting.
It is usually the drug
people start on before
addiction

Average
Rating from
20 Judges
(11=extreme
ly favorable)

8.9
1.6
4.9

This is a scale to measure your attitude toward

marijuana. It does not deal with any other drug, so please
consider that the items pertain to marijuana exclusively.
We want to know how students feel about this topic. In
order to get honest answers, the questionnaires are to be
filled out anonymously. Do not sign your name.
Please check all those statements with which you agree.
___ 1. I don't approve of something that puts you out of a
normal state of mind. (3.0)
___ 2. It has its place. (7.1)
___ 3. It corrupts the individual (2.2)
___ 4. Marijuana does some people a lot of good. (7.9).
___ 5. Having never tried marijuana, I can't say what
effects it would have. (6.0)

Scoring
The weights (favorability rating) for the
checked statements are summed and
divided by the number of statements
checked.
A respondent who selected #3, #7, and
#8 would have an attitude score of 2.2 +
1.6 + 4.9 = 8.7/3 = 2.9. Dividing by the
number of statements checked (3) puts
the score on the 1-11 scale.
A score of 2.9 indicates an attitude that
is definitely unfavorable to marijuana.