Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41912796›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2026

Slider versus Likert scales: Psychometric properties in ambulatory assessment.

Dominik Vollbracht, Charlotte Ottenstein, Sabrina Ecker, Tanja Lischetzke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dominik VollbrachtRPTU University Kaiserslautern-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829, Landau, Germany. d.vollbracht@rptu.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1040-7851
Charlotte OttensteinRPTU University Kaiserslautern-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829, Landau, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0592-765X
Sabrina EckerRPTU University Kaiserslautern-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829, Landau, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5365-1881
Tanja LischetzkeRPTU University Kaiserslautern-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829, Landau, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4326-5127

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Slider scales, a type of visual analogue scale, are commonly used as a response format in smartphone-based ambulatory assessment studies. This may be due to several advantages of slider scales, including the use of a metric scale compared to an ordinal Likert scale and the intuitive use of slider scales on touchscreens. However, research on the comparability of Likert and slider scales remains scarce, especially in the context of ambulatory assessment (i.e., intensive longitudinal data). To address this gap, we conducted a 3-week ambulatory assessment study with four measurement occasions per day, in which we experimentally manipulated the response format (Likert vs. slider scales) between groups. Our final sample consisted of 21,730 measurement occasions nested in 406 participants. We tested for measurement invariance across response-format groups and compared their psychometric properties, including reliability, within-person variability, and validity. Results indicated measurement invariance across groups, with equal factor loadings at the within-person level and equal factor loadings, intercepts, and indicator-specific residual variances at the between-person level. In addition, we found no significant differences in reliability or validity and only minor differences in within-person variability. We discuss the implications of these findings for the design of ambulatory assessment studies and offer recommendations for future research.

Indexed as

Monitoring, AmbulatoryPsychometricsVisual Analog ScaleAdultFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSmartphoneYoung AdultAmbulatory assessmentExperience samplingIntensive longitudinal dataLikert scalesSlider scalesVisual analogue scales

Identifiers

PMID41912796
PMCPMC13035573

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.