Frequency vs. intensity: which should be used as anchors for self-report instruments?

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of the present study was to investigate the usability of verbal rating scale anchors in patients suffering from a depressive episode and whether differences between frequency or intensity scales could be determined. Frequency and intensity terms were evaluated concerning their interindividual congruency, intraindividual stability across time, and distinguishability of adjacent terms.MethodsIn a longitudinal design, 44 patients (age M=39.1, SD=15.2, 68.2% female) with a depressive disorder filled out several established questionnaires (e.g. BDI or SCL-90) and questionnaires containing frequency and intensity terms which should be indicated by the percentage of time or intensity that is reflected by each term at two different measuring times within one week. Data analysis contained t-tests for paired samples and effect sizes d according to Cohen.ResultsIntensity terms showed weaker intraindividual stability across time as compared to frequency terms. Participants were able to reliably distinguish four frequency and intensity terms at both measuring times. Overall congruency between patients was larger for intensity terms in comparison to frequency terms.ConclusionsThe present results indicate that both frequency and intensity terms can be applied as verbal anchors for clinical self-report scales. However, if longitudinal assessment is intended, our results indicate that frequency terms should be used as they showed slightly greater stability across time. Generally, the present study suggests that no more than four different verbal anchors should be used together in rating scales as especially older patients and those with low lexical experience would not be able to reasonably differentiate more than these.

Frequency vs. intensity: Framing effects on patients' use of verbal rating scale anchors

“…(1) and (2) in comparison to the results of our earlier investigation [16] to determine if there is an unfavorable effect of framing on patients' ratings of imprecise terms.…”

“…The influence of further variables such as age and gender on patients' ratings was examined. Results were compared to the results of our earlier investigation [16] to evaluate whether framing has a negative effect on the patients' rating results.…”

“…Recently, we investigated whether we can find empirical evidence for whether frequency or intensity scales should be used in clinical self-report instruments [16]. Terms referring to some amount of frequency or intensity were evaluated concerning their interindividual congruency, intraindividual stability across time and distinguishability of adjacent terms.…”

“…Based on data from the same patient sample as reported in Krabbe and Forkmann [16], the patients' ratings of the presented framed terms were analyzed according to the following criteria: interindividual congruency of mental representations of anchor terms, intraindividual stability across time of mental representations of anchor terms and distinguishability of adjacent terms. The influence of further variables such as age and gender on patients' ratings was examined.…”

“…Based on data acquired from the patients' ratings the presented terms were analyzed concerning their interindividual congruency, intraindividual stability across time and distinguishability of adjacent terms. Afterward, the results were compared to the results regarding the same analysis of unframed terms from an earlier investigation [16]. Methods: In a longitudinal design, 44 patients (age M = 39.1, SD = 15.2, 68.2% female) with a depressive disorder filled out two established questionnaires (BDI or SCL-90) and questionnaires containing frequency and intensity terms framed in sentences concerning the subjective experience of sadness.…”