This article brings the discussions on incorporating perceived importance across study areas into the study of client satisfaction and cautions the use of multiplicative scores (multiplying satisfaction and importance scores) as a weighting method. An alternative weighting method is provided.
Method:
Analyze data from a client satisfaction survey of 103 clients of a publicly funded elderly case management service unit located in a large U.S. Midwest region city.
Results:
The alternative weighted score correlated higher with all the global client satisfaction measures than the multiplicative score.
Conclusion:
Using multiplicative scores to represent global client satisfaction should be avoided. The proposed alternative weighting method is a reasonable way to incorporate perceived importance to represent global client satisfaction.
BollenK.LennoxR. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305–314.
2.
CampbellA.ConverseP. E.RogersW. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
3.
CarifioL.PerlaR. (2007). Ten common misunderstandings, misconceptions, persistent myths and urban legends about Likert scales and Likert response formats and their antidotes. Journal of Social Sciences, 3, 106–116.
4.
CarifioL.PerlaR. (2008). Resolving the 50 year debate around using and misusing Likert scales. Medical Education, 42, 1150–1152.
5.
ChinW. W.NewstedP. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In HoleR. H. (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample research (pp. 307–341). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
CohenP.CohenJ.TeresiJ.MarchiM.VelezC. N. (1990). Problems in the measurement of latent variables in structural equations casual models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 183–196.
8.
DijkersM. P. (2003). Individualization in quality of life measurement: Instruments and approaches. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84, S3–S14.
9.
FerransC. E.PowersM. J. (1985). Quality of life index: Development and psychometric properties. Advances in Nursing Science, 8, 15–24.
10.
FolsteinM. F.FolsteinS. E.McHughP. R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.
11.
GeronS. M.SmithK.TennstedtS.JetteA.ChasslerD.KastenL. (2000). The Home Care Satisfaction Measure: A client centered approach to assessing the satisfaction of frail older adults with home care services. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 55B, S259–S270.
12.
HsiehC. M. (2003). Counting importance: The case of life satisfaction and relative domain importance. Social Indicators Research, 61, 227–240.
13.
HsiehC. M. (2004). Income and financial satisfaction among older adults in the United States. Social Indicators Research, 66, 249–266.
14.
HsiehC. M. (2006). Using client satisfaction to improve case management services for the elderly. Research on Social Work Practice, 16, 605–612.
15.
HsiehC. M. (2009). Importance counts: The role of relative importance of service elements in client satisfaction measures. Journal of Social Service Research, 35, 23–31.
16.
HsiehC. M. (2012a). Incorporating perceived importance of service elements into client satisfaction measures. Research on Social Work Practice, 22, 93–99.
17.
HsiehC. M. (2012b). Importance is not unimportant: The role of importance weighting in QoL measures. Social Indicators Research, 109, 206–278.
18.
HsiehC. M. (2012c). Perceived importance of service elements in client satisfaction measures. Journal of Social Services Research, 38, 529–540.
19.
HsiehC. M. (2012d). Should we give up domain importance weighting in QoL measures?Social Indicators Research, 108, 99–109.
20.
HsiehC. M. (2013). Issues in evaluating importance weighting in quality of life measures. Social Indicators Research, 110, 681–693.
21.
HsiehC. M.EssexE. (2006). Measuring client satisfaction among older adults and families. In BerkmanB. (Ed.), Handbook of social work in health and aging (pp. 1009–1017). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
22.
JamiesonS. (2004). Likert scales: How to (ab)use them. Medical Education, 38, 1212–1218.
23.
NguyenT. D.AttkissonC. C.StegnerB. L. (1983). Assessment of patient satisfaction: Development and refinement of a service evaluation questionnaire. Evaluation and Program Planning, 16, 109–118.
24.
NormanG. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Science Education, 15, 625–632.
25.
ReidP. H.GundlachJ. H. (1983). A scale for the measurement of consumer satisfaction with social services. Journal of Social Service Research, 7, 37–54.
26.
RojasM. (2006). Life satisfaction and satisfaction in domains of life: Is it a simple relationship?Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 467–497.
27.
RussellL. B.HubleyA. M. (2005). Importance ratings and weighting: Old concerns and new perspectives. International Journal of Testing, 5, 105–130.
28.
RussellL. B.HubleyA. M.PalepuA.ZumboB. D. (2006). Does weighting capture what’s important? Revisiting subjective importance weighting with a quality of life measure. Social Indicators Research, 75, 146–167.
29.
ShultzK. S.WhitneyD. J. (2004). Measurement theory in action: Case studies and exercises. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
TrauerT.MackinnonA. (2001). Why are we weighting? The role of importance ratings in quality of life measurement. Quality of Life Research, 10, 579–585.
31.
WuC. H. (2008a). Can we weight satisfaction score with importance ranks across life domains?Social Indicators Research, 86, 468–480.
32.
WuC. H. (2008b). Examining the appropriateness of importance weighting on satisfaction score from range-of-affect hypothesis: Hierarchical linear modeling for within-subject data. Social Indicators Research, 86, 101–111.
33.
WuC. H.YaoG. (2006a). Do we need to weight item satisfaction by item importance? A perspective from Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Social Indicators Research, 79, 485–502.
34.
WuC. H.YaoG. (2006b). Do we need to weight satisfaction scores with importance ratings in measuring quality of life?Social Indicators Research, 78, 305–326.
35.
WuC. H.YaoG. (2007). Importance has been considered in satisfaction evaluation: An experimental examination of Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Social Indicators Research, 81, 521–541.
