The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Research Design Effects on the Reliability of Rating Scales: A Meta-Analysis
Abstract
This meta-analysis investigates the effects of research design on the reliability of rating scale measures used in marketing research. Three sets of independent variables—sampling characteristics, measure characteristics, and measure development processes—are investigated. The overall results suggest that measure characteristics have a major influence on obtained reliability estimates and that sampling characteristics and measure development processes have little impact. These results support measurement theory. The implications for measure development are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Servicescape and loyalty intentions: an empirical investigation
Harris, L. C., & Ezeh, C. (2008) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/03090560810852995 · Cited by 361
A comment on the relationship between coefficient alpha and scale characteristics
Voss, K. E., Stem, D. E., & Fotopoulos, S. (2000) · Marketing Letters · doi:10.1023/a:1008146924781 · Cited by 96
Metadata
- Authors
- Churchill, G. A., & Peter, J. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1984-11
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 360-375
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W4234047540
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Research Design Effects on the Reliability of Rating Scales: A Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/002224378402100402
- The paper
- Churchill, G. A., & Peter, J. P. (1984). Research Design Effects on the Reliability of Rating Scales: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Marketing Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378402100402
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
