You are here

Scale Reviews

Find reliable measures for use in your research. Search Now

Testimonial

The Marketing Scales Handbook is indispensible in identifying how constructs have been measured and the support for a measure's validity and reliability. I have used it since the beginning as a resource in my doctoral seminar and as an aid to my own research. An electronic version will make it even more accessible to researchers in Marketing and affiliated fields.
Dr. Terry Childers
Iowa State University

performance

The scale is composed of six statements measuring the utility resulting from the perceived quality and anticipated performance of a particular brand of a product. One way the scale is distinguished from that of a satisfaction scale is that it could be applied at various stages during the purchase decision process whereas satisfaction is usually measured after the decision.

The complexity of a certain task is measured in this scale with three, seven-point bi-polar adjectives.  The task that was evaluated in the study by Sprott, Czellar, and Spangenberg (2009) was a survey (how complicated it was to answer).

Three items are used in this scale to measure how well a person judges his/her performance to have been of a recently completed task.

A four-item, five-point scale is used to measure the importance of several risk attributes related primarily to the performance of some specified product or economic aspects of its purchase.

Seven, seven-point Likert-type sitems are used for measuring the degree to which a consumer recalls having a positive experience with some specified product. The scale was referred to as experience with previous car by Srinivasan and Ratchford (1991).

The five-item, seven-point scale assesses a research subject's interest in and concern about the task he/she performed as part of a study.

The scale is purported to measure the perceived degree of performance risk associated with a specified product. Performance risk has to do with the uncertainty and consequences of a product failing to function at some expected level.

This scale uses four, seven-point statements to measure the degree to which a person believes that a product reacts to changes in its environment in a stimulus/response manner but without learning to improve its performance over time.

The scale is composed of three, five-point semantic differentials that measure the degree to which a consumer believes that a particular product/brand accomplishes what it is supposed to do.

The scale attempts to measure a consumer's tendency to experience greater satisfaction (dissatisfaction) than the average consumer when products perform better (worse) than expected.