Analysis of Delphi study 7-point linear scale data by parametric methods: Use of the mean and standard deviation

Q1 Social Sciences
J. Franc, K. K. Hung, A. Pirisi, Eric S. Weinstein
{"title":"Analysis of Delphi study 7-point linear scale data by parametric methods: Use of the mean and standard deviation","authors":"J. Franc, K. K. Hung, A. Pirisi, Eric S. Weinstein","doi":"10.1177/20597991231179393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Delphi technique is a unique survey method that involves an iterative process to gain consensus when consensus is challenging to establish. Survey participants typically rate a variety of statements using a specified rating scale. The survey is repeated for several rounds, and at each round statements that do not reach a predefined level of consensus are advanced to the next round while giving the participants information about the responses of other participants for their comparison. The final statements are then ranked in order of the average rating. The statistical methods to analyze Delphi studies are not well described. This study investigates the use of a 1–7 linear rating scale along with parametric summary statistics for assessment of consensus and ranking of statements. A study set of 9297 individual ratings on the 1–7 scale were obtained from previously performed Delphi studies and used to create 490,000 simulated Delphi ratings with various numbers of participants. While the overall distribution of ratings was strongly left skewed the sampling distribution was near normally distributed for studies with five or more participants. The average difference between the standard deviation and interquartile range was −0.26/7. The overall risk of falsely concluding consensus using the standard deviation as a summary statistic was 7.3% when compared to using the interquartile range. The average difference between mean and median was −0.20/7. The risk of falsely ranking the statements by a value of 0.5 or more was near zero for all sample sizes when the mean was compared to the median. This study suggests that the use of the 1–7 linear rating scale in combination with the parametric summary statistics of standard deviation and mean is a valid method to analyze ratings from Delphi studies.","PeriodicalId":32579,"journal":{"name":"Methodological Innovations","volume":"16 1","pages":"226 - 233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Methodological Innovations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991231179393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The Delphi technique is a unique survey method that involves an iterative process to gain consensus when consensus is challenging to establish. Survey participants typically rate a variety of statements using a specified rating scale. The survey is repeated for several rounds, and at each round statements that do not reach a predefined level of consensus are advanced to the next round while giving the participants information about the responses of other participants for their comparison. The final statements are then ranked in order of the average rating. The statistical methods to analyze Delphi studies are not well described. This study investigates the use of a 1–7 linear rating scale along with parametric summary statistics for assessment of consensus and ranking of statements. A study set of 9297 individual ratings on the 1–7 scale were obtained from previously performed Delphi studies and used to create 490,000 simulated Delphi ratings with various numbers of participants. While the overall distribution of ratings was strongly left skewed the sampling distribution was near normally distributed for studies with five or more participants. The average difference between the standard deviation and interquartile range was −0.26/7. The overall risk of falsely concluding consensus using the standard deviation as a summary statistic was 7.3% when compared to using the interquartile range. The average difference between mean and median was −0.20/7. The risk of falsely ranking the statements by a value of 0.5 or more was near zero for all sample sizes when the mean was compared to the median. This study suggests that the use of the 1–7 linear rating scale in combination with the parametric summary statistics of standard deviation and mean is a valid method to analyze ratings from Delphi studies.
采用参数化方法对德尔菲研究的7点线性量表数据进行分析:采用均值和标准差
德尔菲技术是一种独特的调查方法,它涉及一个迭代过程,以在难以建立共识时获得共识。调查参与者通常使用指定的评分量表对各种陈述进行评分。调查重复了几轮,在每一轮中,没有达到预定共识的陈述都会被推进到下一轮,同时向参与者提供其他参与者的回答信息,供他们进行比较。然后按照平均评分的顺序对最终陈述进行排名。分析德尔菲研究的统计方法没有得到很好的描述。本研究调查了使用1-7线性评分量表和参数汇总统计数据来评估共识和陈述排名的情况。从先前进行的德尔菲研究中获得了一组9297个1-7量表的个人评分,并用于创建490000个不同参与者的模拟德尔菲评分。虽然评分的总体分布严重偏左,但对于有五名或五名以上参与者的研究,抽样分布接近正态分布。标准差和四分位间距之间的平均差为-0.26/7。与使用四分位间距相比,使用标准差作为汇总统计得出错误共识的总体风险为7.3%。平均值和中位数之间的平均差值为-0.20/7。当将平均值与中位数进行比较时,所有样本量的陈述错误排名为0.5或以上的风险接近于零。本研究表明,使用1-7线性评分量表结合标准差和均值的参数汇总统计是分析德尔菲研究评分的有效方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Methodological Innovations
Methodological Innovations Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书