Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T17:56:09.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative reliability of categorical and analogue rating scales in the assessment of psychiatric symptomatology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

Marina Remington ,
P. J. Tyrer ,
J. Newson-Smith  and
D. V. Cicchetti
Marina Remington
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Southampton, and the Veterans Administration Hospital, West Haven, Connecticut, USA
P. J. Tyrer*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Southampton, and the Veterans Administration Hospital, West Haven, Connecticut, USA
J. Newson-Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Southampton, and the Veterans Administration Hospital, West Haven, Connecticut, USA
D. V. Cicchetti
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Southampton, and the Veterans Administration Hospital, West Haven, Connecticut, USA
*
1Address for correspondence: Dr P. J. Tyrer, Department of Psychiatry, Royal South Hants Hospital, Graham Road, Southampton.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Synopsis

The reliability of 26 items from the ninth edition of the Present State Examination (PSE) was assessed using both the conventional categorical scales and separately constructed analogue scales. Reliability was also calculated when the analogue responses were rescaled down to 2, 3 and 4 categories. The levels of inter-rater agreement obtained were comparable to those achieved in previous studies of PSE reliability, although as expected the levels of agreement on audiotapes were greater than those for independent interviews performed on the same day. These levels were not significantly affected by any of the changes in scale format, but there were apparent differences in reliability depending on the statistics used. In selecting or constructing a psychiatric rating scale, the question of reliability should not influence the choice of a categorical or continuous scale, or the number of scored points in the scale.

Type
Research Article
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , November 1979 , pp. 765 - 770
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aitken, R. C. B. (1969). Measurement of feelings using visual analogue scales. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 62, 989–993.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartko, J. J. (1966). The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychological Reports 19, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartko, J. J. (1974). Corrective note to: ‘the intraclass coefficient as a measure of reliability’. Psychological Reports 34, 418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendig, A. W. (1954). Reliability and the number of rating scale categories. Journal of Applied Psychology 38, 38–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicchetti, D. V. (1976). Assessing inter-rater reliability for rating scales: resolving some basic issues. British Journal of Psychiatry 129, 452–456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cicchetti, D. V., Aivano, S. L. & Vitale, J. (1976). A computer program for assessing the reliability and systematic bias of individual measurements. Educational and Psychological Measurement 36, 761–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicchetti, D. V., Aivano, S. L. &, Vitale, J. (1977). Computer programs for assessing rater agreement and rater bias for qualitative data. Educational and Psychological Measurement 37, 195–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin 70, 213–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, J. E., Copeland, J. R. M., Brown, G. W., Harris, T. & Gourlay, A. J. (1977). Further studies on interviewer training and inter-rater reliability of the Present State Examination (PSE). Psychological Medicine 7, 517–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferguson, L. W. (1941). A study of the Likert technique of attitude scale construction. Journal of Social Psychology 13, 51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleiss, J. L. (1975). Measuring agreement between two judges on the presence or absence of a trait. Biometrics 31, 651–659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleiss, J. L. & Cohen, J. (1973). The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement 33, 613–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleiss, J. L., Cohen, J. & Everitt, B. S. (1969). Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychological Bulletin 72, 323–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelder, M. G. & Marks, I. M. (1966). Severe agoraphobia: A controlled prospective trial of behaviour therapy. British Journal of Psychiatry 112, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, J. N. (1974). Inter-rater reliability of word rating scales. British Journal of Psychiatry 125, 248–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helzer, J. E., Robins, L. N., Taibleson, M., Woodruff, R. A., Reich, T. & Wish, E. D. (1977). Reliability of psychiatric diagnosis. I. A methodological review. Archives of General Psychiatry 34, 129–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahoda, M., Deutsch, M. & Cook, S. W. (eds.) (1951). Research Methods in Social Relations. Dryden Press: New York.Google Scholar
Kendell, R. E., Everitt, B., Cooper, J. E., Sartorius, N. & David, M. E. (1968). The reliability of the Present State Examination. Social Psychiatry 3, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komorita, S. S. (1963). Attitude content, intensity, and the neutral point on a Likert scale. Journal of Social Psychology 61, 327–334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Komorita, S. S. & Graham, W. K. (1965). Number of scale points and the reliability of scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 4, 987–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lissitz, R. W. & Green, S. B. (1975). Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: a Monte Carlo approach. Journal of Applied Psychology 60, 10–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luria, R. E. & McHugh, P. R. (1974). Reliability and clinical ability of the ‘Wing’ Present State Examination. Archives of General Psychiatry 30, 866–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matell, M. S. & Jacoby, J. (1971). Is there an optional number of alternatives for Likert scale items? Study I: Reliability and validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement 31, 657–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNemar, Q. (1947). Note on the sampling error of the differences between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika 12, 153–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spitzer, R. L. & Fleiss, J. L. (1974). A re-analysis of the reliability of psychiatric diagnosis. British Journal of Psychiatry 125, 341–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spitzer, R. L., Cohen, J., Fleiss, M. S. & Endicott, J. (1967). Quantification of agreement in psychiatric diagnosis. Archives of General Psychiatry 17, 83–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Symonds, P. M. (1924). On the loss of reliability in ratings due to coarseness of scale. Journal of Experimental Psychology 7, 456–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, J. P., Gaind, R. & Marks, I. M. (1971). Prolonged exposure: a rapid treatment for phobias. British Medical Journal i, 13–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wing, J. K., Birley, J. L. T., Cooper, J. E., Graham, P. & Isaacs, A. (1967). Reliability of a procedure for measuring and classifying ‘Present Psychiatric State’. British Journal of Psychiatry 113, 499–575.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wing, J. K., Cooper, J. E. & Sartorius, N. (1974). Measurement and Classification of Psychiatric Symptoms. Cambridge University Press: London.Google Scholar
Wing, J. K., Nixon, J. M., Mann, S. A. & Leff, J. P. (1977). Reliability of the PSE (ninth edition) used in a population study. Psychological Medicine 7, 505–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization (1973). The International Pilot Study of Schizophrenia. WHO: Geneva.Google Scholar