The Likert item response format for items is almost ubiquitous in the social sciences and has particular virtues regarding the relative simplicity of item-generation and the efficiency for coding responses. However, in this article, we critique this very common item format, focusing on its affordance for interpretation in terms of internal structure validity evidence. We suggest an alternative, the Guttman response format, which we see as providing a better approach for gathering and interpreting internal structure validity evidence. Using a specific survey-based example, we illustrate how items in this alternative format can be developed, exemplify how such items operate, and explore some comparisons between the results from using the two formats. In conclusion, we recommend usage of the Guttman response format for improving the interpretability of the resulting outcomes. Finally, we also note how this approach may be used in tandem with items that use the Likert response format to help balance efficiency with interpretability.

中文翻译：

---

寻求效率和可解释性之间更好的平衡：比较 Likert 响应格式与 Guttman 响应格式。


项目的李克特项目响应格式在社会科学中几乎无处不在，并且在项目生成的相对简单性和编码响应的效率方面具有特殊的优点。然而，在本文中，我们批评了这种非常常见的项目格式，重点关注其在内部结构有效性证据方面的解释能力。我们建议采用一种替代方案，即古特曼响应格式，我们认为它为收集和解释内部结构有效性证据提供了更好的方法。使用基于调查的特定示例，我们说明了如何开发这种替代格式的项目，举例说明了此类项目的运作方式，并探讨了使用两种格式的结果之间的一些比较。总之，我们建议使用 Guttman 响应格式来提高结果的可解释性。最后，我们还注意到如何将这种方法与使用 Likert 响应格式的项目结合使用，以帮助平衡效率与可解释性。