Abstract
Self-anchoring scales are ones in which each respondent provides an individual definition of the end points of a dimension and then rates himself on this self defined continuum. Presumably (1) people will rate themselves differently when asked to define anchoring points as against not defining them; and (2) people with different self-definitions of the end points of a dimension will rate themselves differently. To test these two propositions, the responses of subjects (University of Wisconsin introductory psychology students) completing different forms of a work values questionnaire were compared. One group defined anchoring points on half the items, another did no defining, and a third group was administered both forms in a testretest fashion. The results of the analysis provide no evidence that (1) people give different ratings when defining the end points of a dimension, and (2) that different definitions lead to different rankings. The conclusion, therefore, is that self-anchoring scales, compared with scales whose end points are undefined, do not demonstrably provide any special advantage to the researcher.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
