CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 196Psychometric Methodologies and TestingSurvey Methodology and NonresponseReliability and Agreement in Measurement

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Impact of Midpoint Responses and Reverse Coding on Survey Data

Weems, Gail H., Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J.·2001·Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development
DOI 10.1080/07481756.2002.12069033
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Counselors conducting survey research have many item format options to contemplate. This study examined midpoint selection and the effect on reliability of (a) including or excluding midpoint options and (b) using both positively and negatively worded items. Findings indicate that reliability can be affected by both midpoint options and reverse coding.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07481756.2002.12069033

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Nunnally J. C., 1994, Psychometric theory
  2. Onwuegbuzie A. J., 2000, Research in the Schools, 7, 53
  3. Pace C. R., 1994, College Student Experiences Questionnaire
  4. Warland R. H., 1973, Rural Sociology, 38, 174
  5. Wright B. D., 1982, Rating scale analysis.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 196

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Weems, G. H., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Memphis (US)
  • Howard University (US)
Corresponding author
Weems, Gail H.
ORCID
Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J.
Venue
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2001-10-01
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
166-176
ISSN
  • 0748-1756 (ISSN-L)
  • 1947-6302
DOI
10.1080/07481756.2002.12069033
OpenAlex
W1634025776
Cited by
196
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
reliability statistics, survey data quality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review