Anchor Point Effects on the Equivalence of Questionnaire Items

Lam, Tony C. M.; Klockars, Alan J.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1982.tb00137.x

Cited by 67 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In summary, our TAM measurement instrument consists of 20 items in total, with five items for each of the four constructs (PU, PEOU, ATU, and BIU), as listed in Table 3. The response scale for all items is a positive 5-point Likert scale (Lam & Klockars, 1982), where 1 = Strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Slightly agree, 4= Agree, 5= Strongly Agree. Davis et al (1989) PU2 Using the ERP system improved my performance…”

Section: Tam Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Usability Matter? An Analysis of the Impact of Usability on Technology Acceptance in ERP Settings

Scholtz

Mahmud

Ramayah

2016

IJIKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Though the field of management information systems, as a sector and a discipline, is the inventor of many guidelines and models, it appears to be a slow runner on practical implications of interface usability. This usability can influence end users' attitude and behavior to use IT. The purpose of this paper was to examine the interface usability of a popular Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software system, SAP, and to identify related issues and implications to the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). A survey was conducted of 112 SAP ERP users from an organization in the heavy metal industry in Bangladesh. The partial least squares technique was used to analyze the survey data. The survey findings empirically confirmed that interface usability has a significant impact on users' perceptions of usefulness and ease of use which ultimately affects attitudes and intention to use the ERP software. The research model extends the TAM by incorporating three criteria of interface usability. It is the first known study to investigate usability criteria as an extension of TAM.

show abstract

Section: Tam Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Usability Matter? An Analysis of the Impact of Usability on Technology Acceptance in ERP Settings

Scholtz

Mahmud

Ramayah

2016

IJIKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since it was expected that students would rate the various conceptions positively, positive packing was used to increase variance in students' responses and provide more precision in the analysis of the responses (Lam & Klockars, 1982).…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Conceptions of Assessment upon Reading Achievement: An Evaluation of the Influence of Self-efficacy and Interest

Brown¹,

Walton²

2017

Interdiscip Educ Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-regulation of learning requires that students conceive of assessments as a means of reflecting upon and guiding their learning. The relationship of student beliefs about the importance, usefulness, or purpose of assessment to self-efficacy and interest and their joint effect on reading performance has not been investigated. In the context of a large nationally representative survey of New Zealand secondary school students, participants completed either Form 1 or 2 of the Student Conceptions of Assessment (SCoA) inventory version 2, a brief inventory on self-efficacy and interest in reading, and a standardised reading achievement test. Measurement models for both forms of the SCoA were established using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. A structural model relating conceptions of assessment to reading performance for each version of the SCoA inventory was established. Invariance of the models for students with high vs. low levels of selfefficacy or interest in reading was tested. Only two conceptions of assessment had statistically significant relations to achievement (i.e., assessment makes me accountable and assessment is useless). Metric equivalence was found for all groups and forms, except version 2A interest. Accountability effects were generally small and not statistically significant, while effects from useless were stronger and negative. Differences between levels of interest and self-efficacy were small. These results suggest that students with lower and higher self-reported interest and self-efficacy can be treated similarly, with a focus on reducing the maladaptive effects of believing assessment is useless.

show abstract

“…Klockars and Yamagishi (1988) reported that the scale distance between fair and good is constant whether the words are used in balanced or packed rating scales. Hattie (personal communication, February, 1999) reported unpublished research (similar in method to that of Lam & Klockars, 1982) which indicated that the following adverbs would provide nearly-equal intervals on an underlying scale of agreement (i.e., strongly, mostly, moderately, and slightly). Respondents tend to treat adverbs as symmetrical when used in positive and negative sides of neutral; hence, strongly and mostly would have equivalent values when applied to agree and disagree (Smith, Mohler, Harkness, & Onodera, 2005).…”

Section: Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This response format was chosen, because students were inclined to respond positively to all items, and positively-packed rating scales generate greater variance and precision (Brown, 2004b;Klockars & Yamagishi, 1988;Lam & Klockars, 1982).…”

Section: Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is not necessary to assume that the ordered response options (i.e., strongly disagree, mostly disagree, slightly agree, moderately agree, mostly agree, and strongly agree) used in this inventory represent discrete categories of response. Lam and Klockars (1982) showed through a scaling study on the desirability of terms that the terms fair, good, very good, and excellent were equally spaced from each other and that respondents used the rating anchors in responding to items. Klockars and Yamagishi (1988) reported that the scale distance between fair and good is constant whether the words are used in balanced or packed rating scales.…”

Section: Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling typical performance measures

Weekers¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anchor Point Effects on the Equivalence of Questionnaire Items

Cited by 67 publications

References 1 publication

Does Usability Matter? An Analysis of the Impact of Usability on Technology Acceptance in ERP Settings

Does Usability Matter? An Analysis of the Impact of Usability on Technology Acceptance in ERP Settings

The Effect of Conceptions of Assessment upon Reading Achievement: An Evaluation of the Influence of Self-efficacy and Interest

Modeling typical performance measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About