One hundred and twenty-eight subjects responded to one of four differently labeled five-point Likert-type response scales. Although no significant differences in test means and in reliability estimates were found among response scales, the scales did differ on measures of variability. (Author/LMO)

Although behaviorally anchored rating scales have both intuitive and empirical appeal, they have not always yielded superior results in contrast with graphic rating scales. Results indicate that the choice of an anchoring procedure will depend on the nature of the actual rating process. (Author/JKS)

This paper reports on a short version of the Student Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS), a multiple choice questionnaire that measures Type A "coronary-prone" behavior in assessing subjects' A/B types. The primary objective was to determine if the short and long forms of the student JAS represent similar measurement instruments. A secondary…

Using both the Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) and the Purdue University Scales, 727 undergraduates rated 32 instructors. The BARS had less halo effect, more leniency error, and lower interrater reliability. Both formats were valid. The two tests did not differ in rate discrimination or susceptibility to rating bias. (Author/GDC)

To assess the impact of various rating scale formats in rating student teachers, a Likert-type scale (Highly agree/slightly agree/neither/slightly disagree/highly disagree) was derived from the graphic scale currently used by the cooperating teachers and university supervisors. They rated the music student teachers on an eight-point scale from…