Measuring Public Attitudes to Reality TV | Methodology

Measuring Public Attitudes to Reality TV Methodology1. portray the considerations you would make in deciding surrounded by victimization the Thurstone, Likert or Osgood method acting. set off the particular context and conclude with a clear decision round which of the three methods you would chose.The three fri annihilately research methods of attitudinal stepment are assume for use in this experiment as they yet touch statistical evidence to support the questions relating to various attitudes taken from a popular consensus of people. However, individually has its own merits to be considered. The Thurston, Likert and Osgood methods brush off give a representation of societal attitudes toward considerable associate, however, which is the most ideal requires some consideration of their procedural processes. The temper of measurement and descriptive qualities in each method was considered before a demonstrate was decided and questionnaire constructed.Thurstone was o ne of the primary social scaling theorists. He used the average rankings of a set of attitudinal statements based upon a devoted topic to determine a set of agree/disagree responses. He formulated three different methods that all worked upon a uni-dimensional photographic plate. These were the method of equal-appearing intervals, the method of successive intervals, and the method of paired comparisons (Thurston, 1928). The three methods crucially differed in how the scale note values for each item were constituted from their base source. However, in all three cases, the resulting scale was rated the same way by respondents. This labour-some method did not take into account any indifference towards the statements or the tip to which contradict and positive attitudes could vary. In questionnaire format it relies upon closed questions to gain its data and measure attitude. Furthermore, it indicates a mean average as its descriptive data between that of agreeing and disagreeing in each statement division,which does not capture the personality of the bending or sway of general trends in attitude. Neither does it allow for a consideration of say connotation within the statements. Due to these considerations this method of bill attitude was rejected for this experiment.The Likert technique was developed after the Thurstone scale. With this method to social research a set of attitudinal statements were also presented to subjects. Subjects were asked to express agreement or disagreement according to a volt point or septenary point scale measuring the variance of attitude towards the statements (Likert, 1932). Each degree of agreement or disagreement was given a numerical value from one to five / seven rather than being defined as a closed agree or disagree category. A essence numerical value was then to be calculated from the total name of responses. This method is suited to our experiment as it can be utilize to established attitudinal theories much(p renominal) as Ajzens Theory of mean demeanor as a way of drawing out not only attitude but intention and concepts that help shape our attitudes. Essentially, the Likert method can be broken down into segments pertaining to the opening of planned behaviour to find a more sophisticated set of results that indicate a replete(predicate) relationhip than that of the Thurstone method. However, one more method that relates to the Likert method should be considered before despic open on.The Osgood method was developed in conjunction with the Likert technique. Using the scale as the basis for the measurement of attitude, Osgood concerned himself with the significance of meaning, and in particular connotation of words. Typically subjects would be given a word or concept, such as race, and would subsequently be presented with an array of adjectives in which to describe that word / concept (Osgood, 1957). The adjectives would then be represented at either end of a five point / seven-point scale similar to the likert scale. Due to this, Osgood was able to contrive a use or model of peoples connotations for given concepts from which attitudes could be understood. However, there are problems for using this method for our experiment. Firstly, there is the problem that this map depends entirely on the presumption that all adjectives mean the same to everyone. Because of this, the method itself becomes contradictory as it begins from the general self-confidence that peoples connotations for certain cocepts differ. However, it also depends upon the assumption that, for certain words at least, they do not differ. And secondly, there is nobody in this exam that attempts to negate the onset of socially desired responses from participants. For this reason, the Osgood test for connotational attitude was dropped as the method for this experiment in home base of the five category Likert test.2. Provide a detailed description of the go you would need to take at each pose of scale construction, using your chosen method.In the first stage of developing the Likert method for this experiment, pertinent attitudinal questions would have to be established and drawn up. Based upon the preliminary research into certain perceived attitudes towards overlarge blood brother, these questions should be drawn up and utilise to a five point scale ranging from strong agreement by dint of to strong disagreement. These should be comprised into sets of varying attitudinal question types that relate to the different categories sheer in the Theory of Planned behaviour. These sets should consist of questions relating to social averages, attitudes and perceived behavioral get a line (Ajzen, 1991). For example, the first two sets of questions should be taken into account, that is the subjective norm and the attitude, and categorised as one set. For example, based upon the measurement method of the likert five category system, typical questions relating to these sets co uld be do you think Big crony is valid? and do your friends tink big brother is valid?. These endure us with indicators of varying attitudes from which behaviour could be measured as an outcome. For instance, questions then asking would you lodge Big Brother? or is it your intention to watch Big Brother? would give us an peculiarity of the strength and nature of the forces creating the attitudes towards Big Brother. A third set of questions relating to the perceived behavioural control could then tell us of how people perceive the viewing of Big Brother and how that affects their attitudes and intentions towards watching the show. According to the theory of planned behaviour, these three attitudinal variables assert the intention from which behaviours can be understood (Ajzen, 1988, 1991).By taking the findings of this questionnaire through with(predicate) the method of the Likert scale, we are providing ourselves with a technique which can register, incorporate and conk out the findings of a limitless amount of subjects and find trends in the different slipway that people have formed attitudes towards Big Brother. It is with the Likert model that an attitudinal questionnaire based upon the theory of planned behaviour was constructed to answer the main question put ahead by this experiment. An example of the three sets of questions based primarily upon the theory of planned behaviour and developed at this stage are as followsI like to Watch Big Brother? Strongly harmonise / Agree / Indifferent-Unsure-Never Seen It / resist / Strongly Disagree.My Friends Think People Should Watch Big Brother? Strongly Agree / Agree / Indifferent-Unsure-Never Seen It / Disagree / Strongly Disagree.It is Morally unimpeachable to Watch Big Brother? Strongly Agree / Agree / Indifferent-Unsure-Never Seen It / Disagree / Strongly Disagree.The next stage should be firstly concerned with eliminating indeterminate or leading questions such as those involving the terms hate and sexual love or nice and kind of etc. This can be through with(p) where confusion is noticeable manually or where indicated on the results of navigate studies. This stage should then be concerned with fill validity. This can also be done via a pilot test by using the questionnaire to test a group whose attitudes are well established. For example, you would expect members of a Big Brother fan club or groups that promote Big Brother to marker positively on attitudinal questions relating to Big Brother. However, if the results show that they did not score positively then this can be taken as an indication that there is something wrong with the questionnaire. Conversely, if they do score positively then the pilot test can be deemed valid. Alternatively, a professional or technical in matters of attitudinal tests could be consultd for clarity.After these questions have been arranged according to category and the pilot test and/or expert has given sufficient content validity, a s ample group should be engineered and asked to participate. On defining that target group, an introduction giving them the required and ethical briefing should be performed, and on their completion a debriefing and contact address should be disclosed. On retrieval of the results, an appropriate measurement should be carried out to establish the descriptive and inferential statistics of the likert test. The procedure for the Likert does not involve mean averages as these barely convolute the sway of the attitudinal range. Rather, median and modes are better equipped to give descriptive data as the significant range is concerned with general trends rather than precise measures.BibliographyAjzen., I. (1988) Attitudes, Personality and Behaviour, Milton Keynes Open University Press.Ajzen, I., (1991) The Theory of Planned Behaviour. organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 1-33.Osgood, C, E., Suci, G, J., Tannenbaum, P, H., (1957) The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana Uni versity of Illinois Press.Thurston, L, L., (1928) Attitudes can be Measured. American Journal of Sociology, 33, 529-544.Likert, R., (1932) A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1-55.