Visually Oriented Self Report Scales vs. Semantic Differential Scales

This blog post is for my Introduction to Persuasion class at Old Dominion University. I will be analyzing visually oriented self report scales as well as semantic differential scales. A visually oriented self report scale is a scale that represents favorability and unfavorability in degrees while a semantic differential scale is based on the connotative meaning of specific words being asked (Lietzenmayer, 2016). One example of a visual oriented self report scale is much like the image represented in the happy face scale picture. It is a scale represented in pictures so people taking the scale can easily pick a 1, 2 or 3 depending on how they are feeling. Semantic Differential scales, however, are different than visually oriented self report scales. Semantic differential scales have more words and normally have ranges such as probable to improbable or practical to impractical. An example of a semantic differential scale would be shown below in the semantic differential scale picture . They also normally have a bigger range of numbers such as 1 through 7 or 1 through 10.

The benefit of visually oriented self report scales is that you can view how they feel about a specific idea or concept in an easier way. This could be beneficial if the viewer is not able to read or write very well. They would be able to express how they feel about a certain concept in a simple manner. The benefit of semantic differential scales is that the viewer is able to display their thoughts in a wider range such as neutral and most likely as opposed to just a sad face like the visually oriented self report displays (Lietzenmayer, 2016). This can be beneficial when you want to compare two things or you want to see how something is working. This scale would probably be given to many people and then be averaged in order to get a clearer answer.

The Elaboration Likelihood Model and Theory of Reasoned Action have different concepts, however, reach the same end result. These models both end up allowing the viewer of the scales to critically reach a decision by using the information in front of them (Lietzenmayer, 2016). Still, there are problems with using the attitude scales. Some reasons could be because of social desirability bias, non-attitudes, and acquiescence bias. Social desirability bias is when people know they are being watched so they typically act a certain way (Lietzenmayer, 2016). Non-attitudes are when people make up their response because they worry about being uninformed with the subject of the questions (Lietzenmayer, 2016). Lastly, acquiescence bias is when people are likely to agree with whatever they are being asked (Lietzenmayer, 2016). These models can become a problem for the people giving the scales since some viewers will give true answers and some will be false. This can alter the results and not give an accurate measurement.

This assignment has given me insight to different scales used in order to obtain results and information. In the future, I will be able to use these scales and distinguish between them in order to determine which one I need for certain situations. Social desirability bias, non-attitudes, acquiescence bias, mindfulness, and other critiques have also taught me that some scales can be altered. Being mindful of the different scales and ways to use these scales as well as the problems with the scales will help me in the future in order to obtain information.

References: Lietzenmayer, A. (2016). Attitudes. Retrieved from http://ple1.odu.edu/courses/201520/comm333/modules/3/1/1

Picture 1: www.slideshare.net

Picture 2: www.quizlet.com