ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Measurement error is lower for visual analogue scales than for slider scales.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Errors in measurement can arise in study and survey responses when there is a discrepancy between the intended and selected response. A significant portion of the scientific discourse has centered on the comparison of discrete and continuous response scales. In this study, we examined various continuous rating scales to ascertain which scale would yield the lowest measurement error. To this end, we compared visual analogue scales (VAS) with different slider scales in an online study (N = 222) that built upon the original work by Reips and Funke (2008). In this study, participants were asked to estimate where a percentage value would lie on a line ranging from 0 to 100%. The slider scale conditions differed in the initialization of the slider thumb (left, middle, right), with an additional slider condition that employed the default HTML slider with a large thumb without any modifications. The findings of this study suggest that the measurement error in estimating the true value was lower in VAS than in slider scales. Additionally, our findings suggest that VAS lead to reduced variability in errors within and between individuals. Contrary to our initial hypothesis, we did not find a higher measurement error in the default slider than in the other slider conditions. The findings of this study suggest that VAS may offer a more precise means to the assessment of ratings. Practitioners who intend to employ continuous rating scales should consider employing VAS or at least carefully consider the pitfalls of slider scales.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.