1994
DOI: 10.1007/bf01098946
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of diffuse measurement to the evaluation of psychological structures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On this research line, for instance, [21] adopted a system which includes biometric measures of cognitive response process (e.g., response time, computer-mouse trajectories) in the construction of fuzzy responses. Despite their differences, both the approaches have successfully been adopted to measure psychological constructs [27], to evaluate students' perceptions and feelings [28], to measure gendered beliefs [29], to inspect experience of perplexity [30], to evaluate the quality of linguistic descriptions [31], to explore physicals' perception of mental patients [32], to evaluate service quality [33] as well as the quality of products [34]. Unlike direct or indirect fuzzy rating, fuzzy conversion scales adopt stochastic or deterministic procedures (e.g., fuzzy systems) to convert crisp rating data -usually collected by means of traditional rating tools (e.g., Likert-type scales) -into fuzzy sets with the aim of obtaining an improvement of the scaling procedure.…”
Section: Currently Used Methods In Fuzzy Ratingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On this research line, for instance, [21] adopted a system which includes biometric measures of cognitive response process (e.g., response time, computer-mouse trajectories) in the construction of fuzzy responses. Despite their differences, both the approaches have successfully been adopted to measure psychological constructs [27], to evaluate students' perceptions and feelings [28], to measure gendered beliefs [29], to inspect experience of perplexity [30], to evaluate the quality of linguistic descriptions [31], to explore physicals' perception of mental patients [32], to evaluate service quality [33] as well as the quality of products [34]. Unlike direct or indirect fuzzy rating, fuzzy conversion scales adopt stochastic or deterministic procedures (e.g., fuzzy systems) to convert crisp rating data -usually collected by means of traditional rating tools (e.g., Likert-type scales) -into fuzzy sets with the aim of obtaining an improvement of the scaling procedure.…”
Section: Currently Used Methods In Fuzzy Ratingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3.1 Questionnaire with fuzzy set theory After the research of Fuzzy Graphic Rating Scale (FGRS) presented by Hesketh et al (1988), Costas et al (1994) furthered to choose 100 university students as a sample of 1332 MD 52,7 the research, they found that FGRS fits to the feature of human psychology. Herrera and Herrera-Viedma (2000) presented the steps of linguistic decision analysis under linguistic information.…”
Section: Statistical Analysis With Soft Computingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the former asks raters to provide their response by means of a stage-wise methodology, which is in turn supposed to elicit the subjective components of the rating response (e.g., see [5,6,7]), the latter aims at turning standard rating data into fuzzy numbers by means of expert-based or statistical-based procedures (e.g., see [8,9,10]). Despite the differences on the way of mapping fuzzy numbers to the rating process, both provide a valuable strategy to avoid the loss of subjective information entailed by standard rating response formats [11,12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%