Ranking or rating? A critical discussion of Klein and Arzheimer's study

Journal/Book: Kolner Z Soziol Sozialpsychol. 2000; 52: Postfach 5829, W-6200 Wiesbaden, Germany. Westdeutscher Verlag Gmbh. 541+.

Abstract: In a methodological study recently published in this journal (No. 3, Vol. 51, 1999: 550-564), Klein and Arzheimer compared two competing methods for the measurement of personal value orientations, namely, rating and ranking. Focussing on postmaterialist value orientations, they concluded chat ratings are superior. In this article, it is argued that this conclusion is based on a misleading interpretation of findings and a questionable research design. In particular, the authors do not address the validity of the two measurement methods, implicitly assuming that they both capture the same cognitive dimension. Since it is unclear whether or not this assumption holds, a broader research approach is suggested here, which allows assessment of both the validity and the reliability of the competing methods. Given the lack of empirical evidence regarding these points, theoretical considerations, briefly outlined in the last section, are crucial for the selection of an appropriate measurement strategy.

Note: Article Sacchi S, ETH Zentrum, SEW E27, Scheuchzerstr 70, CH-8092 Zurich, SWITZERLAND

Keyword(s): measurement of value orientations; postmaterialism scale; ranking; rating; validation; methodological experiment; alternative research approach; FLEXIBLE ALTERNATIVES; POLARIZED PRIORITIES; INGLEHART-INDEX; POSTMATERIALISM; DIMENSIONALITY

Zurück | Weiter