Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices
- PMID: 32025957
- PMCID: PMC6966966
- DOI: 10.1186/s41155-016-0057-1
Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices
Erratum in
-
Erratum to: Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices.Psicol Reflex Crit. 2017 Mar 3;30(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41155-017-0059-7. Psicol Reflex Crit. 2017. PMID: 32026135 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Abstract
The scale development process is critical to building knowledge in human and social sciences. The present paper aimed (a) to provide a systematic review of the published literature regarding current practices of the scale development process, (b) to assess the main limitations reported by the authors in these processes, and (c) to provide a set of recommendations for best practices in future scale development research. Papers were selected in September 2015, with the search terms "scale development" and "limitations" from three databases: Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, with no time restriction. We evaluated 105 studies published between 1976 and 2015. The analysis considered the three basic steps in scale development: item generation, theoretical analysis, and psychometric analysis. The study identified ten main types of limitation in these practices reported in the literature: sample characteristic limitations, methodological limitations, psychometric limitations, qualitative research limitations, missing data, social desirability bias, item limitations, brevity of the scale, difficulty controlling all variables, and lack of manual instructions. Considering these results, various studies analyzed in this review clearly identified methodological weaknesses in the scale development process (e.g., smaller sample sizes in psychometric analysis), but only a few researchers recognized and recorded these limitations. We hope that a systematic knowledge of the difficulties usually reported in scale development will help future researchers to recognize their own limitations and especially to make the most appropriate choices among different conceptions and methodological strategies.
Keywords: Assessment; Measurement; Psychometrics; Reliability; Validity.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Figures
References
-
- Aagja JP, Garg R. Measuring perceived service quality for public hospitals (PubHosQual) in the Indian context. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing. 2010;4(10):60–83. doi: 10.1108/17506121011036033. - DOI
-
- Ahmad N, Awan MU, Raouf A, Sparks L. Development of a service quality scale for pharmaceutical supply chains. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing. 2009;3(1):26–45. doi: 10.1108/17506120910948494. - DOI
-
- Akter S, D’Ambra J, Ray P. Development and validation of an instrument to measure user perceived service quality of mHealth. Information and Management. 2013;50:181–195. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2013.03.001. - DOI
-
- Alvarado-Herrera, A, Bigne, E, Aldas-Manzano, J, & Curras-Perez, R. (2015). A scale for measuring consumer perceptions of corporate social responsibility following the sustainable development paradigm. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-20. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2654-9 - DOI
-
- Arias, M. R. M., Lloreda, M. J. H., & Lloreda, M. V. H. (2014). Psicometría. S.A.: Alianza Editorial
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources