Measurement Scales

Now that weve established what measurement is, and some key features that make the measurement
process good, we can get into the details of how measurement is carried out. As dened by Stevens
(1946), measurement involves the assignment of values to objects according to certain rules. The
rules that guide the measurement process determine the type of measurement scale that is produced
and the statistics that can be used with that scale.

Four types of scales

Measurement scales are grouped into four dierent types. These dier in the meaning that is given to
the values that are assigned, and the relationship between these values for a given variable.

Nominal

The most basic measurement scale is really the absence of a scale, because the values used are
simple categories or names, rather than quantities of a variable. For this reason it is referred to as a
nominal scale, where people are grouped qualitatively, for example by gender or political party. The
nominal scale can also represent variables such as zip code or eye color, where multiple categories
are present. So, identifying variables such as student last name or school ID are also considered
nominal.

Only frequencies, proportions, and percentages (and related nonparametric statistics) are permitted
with nominal variables. Means and standard deviations (and related parametric statistics) do not
work. It would be meaningless to calculate something like an average gender or eye color, because
nominal variables lack any inherent ordering or quantity in their values.

Ordinal

The dominant feature of the ordinal scale is order, where values do have an inherent ordering that
cannot be removed without losing meaning. Common examples of ordinal scales include ranks (e.g.,
rst, second, third, etc.), the multi-point rating scales seen in surveys (e.g., strongly disagree,
disagree, etc.), and level of educational attainment.

The distance between the ordered categories in ordinal scale variables (i.e., the interval) is never
established. So, the dierence between rst and second place does not necessarily mean the same
thing as the dierence between second and third. In a swimming race, rst and second might dier
by a matter of milliseconds, whereas second and third dier by minutes. We know that rst is faster
than second, and second is faster than third, but we dont know how much faster. Note that the
construct were measuring here is probably swimming ability, which is actually operationalized on a
ratio scale, in terms of speed, but it is simplied to an ordinal scale when giving out awards.

Statistics which rely on interval level information, such as the mean, standard deviation, and all
mean-based statistical tests, are still not allowed with an ordinal scale. Statistics permitted with
ordinal variables include the median and any statistics based on percentiles.

Interval

Interval scales include ordered values where the distances, or intervals, between them are
meaningful. Whereas an ordinal scale describes one category only as greater than, less than, or equal
to another, with an interval scale the dierence between categories is quantied in scale points that
have a consistent meaning across the scale. With interval scales we can nally use means, standard
deviations, and related parametric statistical tests.

One common example of an interval scale is test score based on number correct, where each item in
a test is worth the same amount when calculating the total. When treating test scores as interval
variables, we make the assumption that a dierence in score points reects a consistent dierence in
the construct no matter where we are on the scale. This can sometimes be problematic. A test of
vocabulary could be measured on an interval scale, where each correctly dened word contributes
the same amount to the total score. However, in this case we assume that each correct denition is
based on the same amount of construct, vocabulary knowledge. That is, the vocabulary words need
to be similar in diculty for the students were testing. Otherwise, scale intervals will not have a
consistent meaning. Instead, an increase in number correct will depend on the word that is answered
correctly.

Another common example of an interval scale is temperature as measured in degrees centigrade or

Fahrenheit. These temperature scales both have meaningful intervals, where a given increase in heat,
for example, produces the same increase in degrees no matter where you are on the scale. However, a
zero on the Fahrenheit or centigrade scales does not indicate an absence of the variable we are
measuring, temperature. This is the key distinction between an interval and a ratio scale.

Ratio

The ratio scale is an interval scale with a meaningful absolute zero, or a point at which there is an
absence of the variable measured. Whereas an interval scale describes dierences between scale
values in scale points, a ratio scale can compare values by ratios. A simple example is time, where 1
hour is equivalent to 2/3 hours + 1/3 hours. Other examples include counts of observations or
occurrences, such as the number of aggressive or prosocial behaviors per hour, or the frequency of
drug use in the past month.

Note that we often reference ratio scales when operationalizing constructs, in which case we may
lose our meaningful zero point. For example, zero prosocial behaviors does in fact indicate that
nothing noticeably prosocial occurred for a student over a certain period of time. However, this may
not mean that a student is completely void of prosociability. In the same way, zero aggressive
behaviors does not necessarily indicate an absence of aggression. Thus, when a ratio variable is used
to operationalize a construct, it may necessarily lose its ratio properties.

All statistics are permitted with ratio scales, though the only ones we talk about, in addition to those
available with interval scales, are statistics that let you make comparisons in scores using ratios. For
example, a two hour test is twice as long as a one hour test, and ve aggressive episodes is half as
many as ten. However, as before, if our scale is assumed to reference some underlying construct, ve
aggressive episodes may not indicate twice as much aggression as ten.

Comparing scales

Progressing from nominal to ratio, the measurement scales become more descriptive of the variable
they represent, and more statistical options become available. In general, the further from a nominal
scale the better, as once the scale is designated it cannot be upgraded, only downgraded. For
example, the variable age could be represented in the following four ways:
1.
number of days spent living, from 0 to innity;
2.
day born within a given year, from 1 to 365;
3.
degree of youngness, including toddler, adolescent, adult, etc.; or
4.
type of youngness, such as the same as Mike, or the same as Ike.

The rst of these four, a ratio scale, is the most versatile and can be converted into any of the scales
below it. However, once age is dened based on a classication, such as same as Mike, no
improvement can be made. For this reason a variables measurement scale should be considered in
the planning stages of test design, ideally when we identify the purpose of our test.

In the social sciences, measurement with the ratio scale is dicult to achieve because our
operationalizations of constructs typically dont have meaningful zeros. So, interval scales are
considered optimal, though they too are not easily obtained. Consider the sociability measure
described above. What type of scale is captured by this measure? Does a zero score indicate a total
absence of sociability? This is required for ratio. Does an incremental increase at one end of the scale
mean the same thing as an incremental increase at the other end of the scale? This is required for
interval.

Upon close examination, it is dicult to measure sociability, and most other constructs in the social
sciences, with anything more than an ordinal scale. Unfortunately, an interval or ratio scale is
required for the majority of statistics that wed like to use. Along these lines, Stevens (1946, p. 679)
concluded:

Most of the scales used widely and eectively by psychologists are ordinal scales. In the strictest
propriety the ordinary statistics involving means and standard deviations ought not to be used with
these scales, for these statistics imply a knowledge of something more than the relative rank-order of
data. On the other hand, for this illegal statisticizing there can be invoked a kind of pragmatic
sanction: In numerous instances it leads to fruitful results. While the outlawing of this procedure
would probably serve no good purpose, it is proper to point out that means and standard deviations
computed on an ordinal scale are in error to the extent that the successive intervals on the scale are
unequal in size. When only the rank-order of data is known, we should proceed cautiously with our
statistics, and especially with the conclusions we draw from them.

Based on this argument, a mean sociability score is only as useful as the scale itself is interval. The
less meaningful the intervals between sociability scores, the less meaningful our mean estimate will
be. Thus, when designing an instrument, we need to be aware of this limitation, and do our best to
improve the intervalness of our scales. When stating the purpose of a test, we need to be aware of
how our construct and operationalization of it will impact our resulting scale. Finally, we need to
acknowledge the limitations of our scales, especially when utilizing potentially incorrect statistics