Return-Path: <nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fATL8n004346; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:08:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:08:49 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <15e.4bcd108.2937fcdb@aol.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Dwyoho@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-HEALTH:3473] Re: likert scales for low-literacy readers X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_15e.4bcd108.2937fcdb_boundary" Status: O Content-Length: 2209 Lines: 48 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/29/2001 9:17:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, havey@emory.edu writes: > . My suspicion is that people with low literacy may > be more likely to choose extreme options on likert scales, possibly because > the > With many low literacy readers, it isn't subtle variations that are the problem, but the fact that a likert scale was used to begin with. Also, rarely will a low-literacy reader make the effort to read the directions. Deborah W. Yoho Co-moderator, NIFL Health Literacy Discussion Group Chief Executive Officer Greater Columbia Literacy Council 921 Woodrow Street Columbia, SC 29205 803/765-2555 dwyoho@aol.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:28:44 EST