TRADE-OFF VS. CATEGORICAL JUDGEMENT: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TWO ATTITUDE SCALING METHODS FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
This paper describes a comparative analysis of categorical judgment and trade-off, two attitude scaling methods used by transportation planners. A split-half sample of NYSDOT employees is administered two spearate versions of a questionnaire on staggered work hours. The samples are matched demographically. Within the trade-off version, the split-half procedure is again used to study effects of item position on stability of results. The analysis shows that these two methods of attitude measurement are not equivalent. Categorical judgment is a reasonable method if extreme (related to the present) policies are being analyzed. However, trade-off analysis better extracts the underlying cases behind attitudes toward incremental policies, i.e., policies close to the present. The item position analysis suggests that there is considerable position bias in the trade-off analysis questionnaire, which is at least as great as the sensitivity of the technique itself. Hence, provision should be made to alleviate any position bias which is inherent in the trade-off analysis questionnaire.
Albany, NY United States 12232
- Eberts, P M
- Publication Date: 1977-2
- Features: Figures; References; Tables;
- Pagination: 58 p.
- TRT Terms: Alternatives analysis; Attitudes; Judgment (Human characteristics); Measurement; Questionnaires; Staggered work hours; Transportation planning
- Uncontrolled Terms: Scaling
- Subject Areas: Administration and Management; Economics; Highways; Planning and Forecasting; Society;
- Accession Number: 00180446
- Record Type: Publication
- Report/Paper Numbers: Res. Rpt. 114
- Files: TRIS, STATEDOT
- Created Date: Oct 12 1978 12:00AM