rsaas

1
RATING SCALES

• By
• M. MUTHU SASI REKHA

2
SYNOPSIS

• Introduction
• Definitions
• Rating
• Principles of defining rating scale
• Types of rating scales
• Personality Profile
• Sources of errors in rating scales
• Merits of rating scales
• Defects of rating scales
• Improving the rating scales
• Conclusion

3
INTRODUCTION

• Rating scale is an important technique of
  evaluation. Rating is the assessments of a
  person by another person. This is one of the
  oldest methods of personality assessment.There
  are certain general approaches to assess
  personality like holistic or overall approach,
  projective test approach and trait approach. In
  this rating scales and inventories come under the
  trait approach.

4
DEFINITIONS

• Barr others define rating as Rating is a term
  applied to expression of opinion or judgement
  regarding some situation, object or character.
  Opinions are usually expressed on a scale of
  values. Rating techniques are devices by which
  such judgements may be quantified.
• A rating scale is a device by which the opinion
  concerning a trait can be systematized.

5
RATING

• Three point scale
• Above average / Average / Below average
• Five point scale
• Excellent / Very good / Good / Average /
  Poor
• Seven point scale

6
PRINCIPLES OF DEFINING A RATING SCALE

• The characteristics should be clearly
  defined
• The characteristics should be readily
  observable
• Degrees of the characteristics must be
  defined

7
TYPES OF RATING SCALES

• Numerical Rating scale
• Descriptive Rating Scale
• Graphical Rating Scale
• Score cards
• The rank Order Scale
• Method of Paired comparisons
• Man-To-Man Scale

8
Numerical Rating scale

• In which numbers are assigned to each trait. If
  it is a seven point scale, the number 7
  represents the maximum amount of that trait in
  the individual, and 4 represents the average.
  The rater merely enters the appropriate number
  after each name to indicate judgement of the
  person.
• A B C D
  E F G
• 1 2 3 4
  5 6 7

9
Descriptive Rating Scale

• In which descriptive phrases or terms assigned to
  each trait. The rater enters the appropriate
  phrase after each name to indicate judgement of
  the person.
• A B C D
  E
• Excellent Good Average Below
  average poor

10
Graphical Rating Scale

• A straight line, may be represented by
  descriptive phrases at various points. To rate
  the subject for a particular trait a check mark
  is made at the particular point.
• Low Moral Good Moral High Moral
• 0 25 50 75
  100

11
Score cards

• It is a type of scale in which whatever is
  being rated is analysed into its component parts.
  An expert assigns each part of a maximum
  score. The rater assign a value to each item
  as he passes judgement, and these values are
  totaled a final score is pronounced.

12
The Rank Order Scale

• In this type the judge is simply required to
  place the people being rated in a rank order from
  high to low on the attitude or opinion in
  question. A given individuals scale position is
  given in relation to other people in the sample.
  The units of the scale are unequal.

13
Method of Paired comparisons

• In which the rater compares each person being
  rated with respect to the trait of every other
  individual, being rated in the general terms of
  equal better or worse.

14
Man-To-Man Scale

• In this case, an individual is asked to
  rate the person to be rated (the rate) by
  comparing him to a person already rated and
  assigned a position on the scales. The rate
  is assigned his position.

15
PERSONALITY PROFILE / PSYCHOGRAPH

• When rating have been obtained on several traits
  of the same individual they may be combined in a
  diagram known as the Personality profile.
• A number of rating scales of the same individual
  in a variety of traits may be combined in
  the form of a psychograph or personality
  profile.

16
PERSONALITY PROFILE (OF BANK CASHIER)
3






2
1
Average
-1
-2
-3
Honesty
Anxiety
Intelligence
Persistance
Sociability
Dominance
Cooperation
17
SOURCES OF ERRORS IN RATING SCALES

• There are several common sources of error in
  rating scales. All these sources affect the
  validity of a rating. Errors may be due to
• 1. Ambiguity
• 2. The personality of the rater -
• - Halo effect - Generosity error
• - Severity error - Central tendecy
• 3. Logical error
• 4. Attitude of the rater.
• 5. Oppurtunity for adequate abservation.

18
SOURCES OF ERRORS IN RATING SCALES continued

• 1.Ambiguity
• This refers to the wording and meaning of the
  traits that are measured, e.g., To one rater,
  aggressiveness may be a positive trait suggesting
  self assertion. To another it may connote
  hostility. The term such as honest, effective and
  fruitful learning, intelligent citizen,
  personality, ideal character etc. must be
  clarified. Unless all pupils are rated on the
  same attributes, the rating will be invalid and
  unreliable.

19
SOURCES OF ERRORS IN RATING SCALES continued

• 2. Personality of the Raters
• The Halo effect
• Generosity error
• Severity error
• Central tendency error

20
SOURCES OF ERRORS IN RATING SCALES continued

• 3. Logical error
• A logical error is closely related to
  the halo effect, but is not due to personal bias.
  It occurs when two traits, such as intelligence
  and socio-economic status are closely related and
  the rater is influenced in his rating of one by
  the presence or absence of the other intelligent
  persons posses a high socio-economic status.

21
SOURCES OF ERRORS IN RATING SCALES continued

• 4. Attitude of Raters
• Accurate observation is a very time-consuming
  process. Unless the raters truly believe that
  there is some value to be derived from ratings,
  they may consider them only as another
  administrative process and not to do a
  conscientious job.
•  

22
SOURCES OF ERRORS IN RATING SCALES continued

• 5. Opportunity for Adequate Observation
• This is the most serious error. The error is
  committed when the rater does not know well
  enough the pupil he is rating. The only
  reasonable thing to do is to refuse to rate the
  pupil on those traits about which you have little
  or no knowledge.
•  

23
MERITS OF RATING SCALES

•    Less subjective than casual observation,
•    An analytical judgement.
•    Helps comparison of individuals.
•    Stimulates person being rated.

24
DEFECTS OF THE RATING SCALES

• Error of Lenience or severity
• Error or central tendency
• Halo effect

25
IMPROVING THE RATING SCALE

• i) Identify educationally significant traits.
• ii) Clearly define the traits to be rated and
  the scale points to be used.
• iii) Avoid technical jargon. If slang will help
  convey the intent, use it by all means.
• iv) Express the traits to be rated as question
  rather then as declarative statements.
• v) If the line showing the continuum is
  used, it should follow immediately after the
  questions,
• vi) Determine how discrimination you want
  the ratings and divide the continuum
  accordingly. (Three to seven intervals).
•  

26
CONCLUSION

• In order to minimize the problem semantics
  and to make Rating Scales more useful, it is
  necessary to observe certain established
  principles. Firstly, the trait must be clearly
  defined. Secondly, the degrees of the trait must
  be clearly defined. Thirdly, the rater may be
  asked to quote instances in support of his
  judgement. Fourthly, the rater should be
  instructed not to record anything on the scale.
  Fifthly, the rater should be instructed to avoid
  Halo-Effect and finally, it is better to obtain
  ratings of a particular person rather than from
  more than one judge.

27
THANK YOU