You are here

Scale Reviews

Find reliable measures for use in your questionnaires. Search Now


This website has truly been a welcome gift! The Day Pass is extremely affordable & the site is so user friendly to navigate. It provides a wealth of information including, the source, validity, & references for my doctorate research project. I highly recommend this to anyone as it is truly an invaluable research tool!
Suzanne Cromlish, PhD
Saint Xavier University, Chicago


This is a multi-item, seven-point Likert-type scale measuring the degree to which a consumer reports using coupons and enjoying it. A five-item version was used by Lichtenstein, Ridgway, and Netemeyer (1993), Lichtenstein, Netemeyer, and Burton (1995), Lichtenstein, Burton, and Netemeyer (1997), and Burton et al. (1998, 1999). In those studies the scale was referred to as coupon proneness.

The nine-point, seven item Likert-type scale is intended to measure the degree of pleasure one expects would be experienced if able to pick items to eat from an assortment of a specific food, e.g., jelly beans.

The scale has three, nine-point, Likert-type statements that are intended to measure the extent to which one believes an assortment of a given product one was exposed to was aesthetically pleasing.

Three, nine-point, Likert-type items are used to measure the degree of pleasure one experienced upon eating a specific food, e.g., jelly beans.

The degree to which a person considers a website to be enjoyable, particularly in the way it looks, is measured in this four item, nine-point scale.

A viewer's global evaluation of a television show is measured in this scale with three, seven-point semantic differentials.

The scales grouped in this review consist of multiple bi-polar adjectives presumed to measure a consumer’s overall evaluation of a product or brand. The various versions of the scale are similar in that the items themselves are not specific to any particular product or brand although certain adjectives may not be appropriate in all cases. Some researchers have referred to their measures by other names such as product evaluation (e.g., Muthukrishnan and Ramaswami 1999; Gürhan-Canli and Batra 2004) and product utility (Thompson et al. 2005).

Scales made from these items have also been used with objects other than typical “products.”  In Lane (2000), a version of this scale was used as an evaluation of a hypothetical brand extension. Stafford and Day (1995) measured attitudes toward a service rather than a good. Given the directions used by Gürhan-Canli and Maheswaran (2000), their scale appeared to be a country-of-origin evaluation of a class of products. One of the three uses of the scale by Ruth and Simonin (2003) was with an event (parade) sponsored by two companies. Attitude toward a hotel chain was measured by Posavac et al. (2004).


The scale is composed of five, seven-point semantic differentials that are intended to measure the portion of a person's attitude resulting from sensations derived from experience or the sensations one imagines would be experienced. The scale is amenable for use with product categories or more specifically with brands.

A consumer's attitude toward a certain product is assessed with three, five-point Likert-type statements. The emphasis of the scale is on the affective component of one's an attitude. The scale was referred to as owner-product relationship by McAlexander, Schouten, and Koenig (2002).

The various collections of bi-polar adjectives reviewed here are presumed to measure a person’s global evaluation of an advertisement.  Commonly symbolized by Aad, the scales tend to be applicable to most any ad.  Seven-point scales seem to be the most popular response format but five- and nine-point scales have been used as well.