The study used a semantic differential. Some typical scales

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Semantic differential and graphic rating scale

Semantic differential scale implies the presence of two polar semantic meanings (antonyms) or antonymic positions, between which there is an odd number of gradations. In this sense, the scale is bipolar. As a rule, seven gradations are considered. The middle position (medium gradation) is considered neutral. Digitization of scale gradations can be unipolar, for example in the form "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7", or bipolar, for example in the form "-3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3".

Usually the poles of the scales are given verbally (verbally). Examples of scales with two poles are as follows: "soothing - invigorating" or "compact - voluminous". Along with verbal semantic differentials, non-verbal semantic differentials have been developed that use graphic images as poles.

Examples of verbal semantic differentials are given in fig. 8.2.

Rice. 8.2.

The semantic differential resembles the Likert scale, but has the following differences: 1) both polar statements are formulated instead of one; 2) instead of the names of intermediate gradations, a sequential graphic arrangement of an odd number of gradations located between the extreme values of "good - bad" is given.

Semantic differential method (from the Greek. sematicos - denoting and lat. differentia- difference) was proposed by the American psychologist C. Osgood in 1952 and is used in studies related to human perception and behavior, with the analysis of social attitudes and personal meanings, in psychology and sociology, in the theory of mass communications and advertising, and in marketing.

It can be considered as an analogue of the semantic differential scale. The rating scale is implemented in such a way that each property is assigned a line, the ends of which correspond to polar statements, for example: "not important" and "very important", "good" and "bad" (Fig. 8.3).

Rice. 8.3.

The fundamental difference between the compared scales is that the semantic differential is a discrete scale, and, as a rule, it has seven gradations, and the graphic rating scale is continuous.

So, when characterizing the exterior of certain brands of cars, it is sometimes said that brutality is inherent in it. There are also simpler examples - ergonomics and controllability, when it is difficult to meaningfully name the second pole.

Semantic differential (SD) - one of the projective methods of sociology, based on the achievements of psychosemantics, was developed by a group of American psychologists led by C. Osgood in 1952. It is used in studies related to the perception and behavior of a person, with the analysis of social attitudes and personal meanings. The SD method is a combination of the controlled association method and scaling procedures.

Psychosemantic methods transfer information from the cognitive level (and the research task is always formulated in terms of its concepts) to the affective level, where this information is encoded not by linguistic forms, but by various sensations.

The method of semantic differential is based on the phenomenon of synesthesia (thinking by analogy, when some sensory perceptions arise under the influence of others) and is an operational way of “capturing” the emotional side of the meaning perceived by an individual in objects. SD allows you to identify unconscious associative links between objects in the minds of people.

The SD method makes it possible to find a system of latent factors within which an individual evaluates objects. In essence, the semantic space is a research model of the structure of individual consciousness, and the task is to determine where in this space the object under study is located.

Tested objects (name, brand, packaging, etc.) are evaluated on a number of bimodal seven-point scales, the poles of which are usually specified verbally using antonyms: good - bad, warm - cold, active - passive, etc. It is assumed that a person is able to evaluate the object under study, correlating the intensity of inner feelings about the object with a given rating scale. The divisions of the scale fix the various degrees of this quality of the object. Scales that correlate with each other are grouped into independent factors that form a semantic space.

Along with verbal ones, non-verbal semantic differentials have also been developed, where graphic oppositions, picturesque pictures, photographic portraits are used as the poles of the scales.

In studies, monopolar scales are often used, with the help of which objects are evaluated by the severity of one property: how good the object is, how warm, etc. In the case of bimodal scales, the respondent assesses where the object “A” is for him on the scale “expensive - cheap”, and with unimodal scales, he assesses how much the property “high cost” is inherent in the object “A”. The use of unimodal scales is due to the fact that often antonymous adjectives are not actually complete opposites - bad is not always bad.

In the classical version of Ch. Osgood, only connotative features were used as scales, which reflected not the objective properties of the object being evaluated, concepts, but the subjectively significant aspects of the object, concepts for the respondent.

In marketing research, denotative scales are a recognized tool for studying the image of a corporation, brand or product, which do not always consist only of antonymous adjectives, but, as a rule, are phrases that express expectations, product characteristics, both negative and negative. positive. Similar products from different manufacturing companies can be evaluated on a “worth the money” scale, for example, banks - in terms of reliability, profitability, etc.

A set of scales (15-25 scales) is used to preserve the "spirit" of the method and fix the still affective elements of the attitude. The result of the methodology is not directly calculated average values of objects for each of the scales, but latent factors obtained during a special analysis procedure, on the basis of which the semantic space of perception of objects is formed and a map of their relative position is built. It is important to choose a sufficient number of scales and test them on experts or conduct an associative experiment on representatives of the target group in order to avoid the danger of the researcher's subjectivity when choosing scales.

SD scales do not describe reality, but are a metaphorical expression of the states and relationships of the subject (the instruction that the respondents receive calls for: “when grading, be guided by your own feelings, not knowledge”). In the resulting space of affective meanings, there is a convergence of concepts to which a person reacts in a similar way, and a separation of concepts that have a different emotional background. The distance between concepts is expressed by a certain number, which in general terms makes it possible to distinguish between assessments of: a) the same concept by different individuals (or different groups); b) different concepts by the same individual (or group); c) the same concept by the same individual (or group) at different times.

The number of factors identified corresponds to the structure of the emotional perception of a given class of objects, for example, when evaluating a bank, only two factors can be identified: reliability and profitability, while a car can be evaluated according to the criteria of “fashion, style”, “prestige, status”, “ prices”, “economy of operation”, “after-sales service networks”, etc.

The procedure for the formation of a semantic differential methodology within a specific research project usually consists of the following steps:

Formation and testing of a list of adjectives, statements to describe the tested objects (names, concepts, types of packaging, brands, etc.). The level of awareness at which the respondent will evaluate the measured object depends on the selected features. By focusing on denotative scales, we expand the semantic space, increasing information about objects and inevitably losing information about subjects, which is not so critical in marketing research.

Mathematical processing of the obtained data matrix: object - respondent - scale. Typically, a factor analysis procedure is used, which makes it possible to identify latent evaluation criteria into which the initial scales are added. It is important to note that in order to obtain significant results, relatively small samples are sufficient - 30-50 people, due to the fact that the unit of analysis is not the respondent, but the assessments that he makes of the objects. Given that each of the 30-50 respondents evaluates 7-10 objects on 15-25 scales, the total sample size is quite sufficient to draw statistically significant conclusions.

Placement in the constructed semantic space of the evaluated objects, analysis of the resulting distribution. Estimation of the distance between the tested objects and the ideal object (for example, the ideal yogurt, car, “myself”, etc.), to determine the “positive” poles of the factors. For example, if we received the factor “fashionableness, style, brightness” of a car, then it is important to understand whether the high marks of our brand for this factor are positive for the target audience or not. Perhaps the ideal car for them is a reliable, conservative “iron horse”, economical in terms of fuel consumption and without any quirks in design.

Stage 1 Formation and testing of the list of statements.

The toolkit used in the semantic differential technique usually consists of a table of the following form: the scales are placed in the rows, and the evaluated objects are in the columns. The instruction offered to the respondent is formulated approximately as follows: “Please rate the characteristics of each of the brands “…” on a scale from 0 to 5, where 0 - there is no such property, and 5 - the property is expressed as much as possible. In the “perfect…” column, write down what properties a good… should have, using a scale from 0 to 5, where 0 - this property should not be, and 5 - the property should be inherent in the product to the maximum extent.

Considering that 30-50 people are quite sufficient for a homogeneous group of respondents in the framework of this methodology, it is often convenient to collect information in parallel with a focus group study. Considering that usually the introduction of a new brand, name, packaging is accompanied by a series of focus groups, 30-50 questionnaires can be collected during 3-5 groups. Such a sample size turns out to be quite sufficient to supplement the conscious, rational information provided by the respondents with assessments of the affective elements of the attitude, i.e. to collect extraconscious, emotional, irrational data that the semantic differential technique allows to obtain.

Figure 4 - An example of a semantic differential table for evaluating objects

Stage 2. Mathematical processing of the results and their interpretation

The SD technique makes it possible to process the results and interpret them quite clearly with the help of the simplest statistical characteristics. As such characteristics, the average value of the measured value, the standard deviation, the correlation coefficient are proposed. The primary processing of the results consists in compiling a statistical series of the measured value for each object under study. Then, the average statistical value of the measured value for the sample and the measure of unanimity of estimates, expressed as the standard deviation, are calculated. After the average estimates of each object for the three measured indicators have been identified, it is interesting to trace their interdependence. Thus, the algorithm for mathematical processing of SD results is as follows:

Step 1. Drawing up a statistical series in the form of a table.

X i - assessment of a certain quality of the object on a seven-point scale;

n i is the frequency of the X i value, i.e. how many times X i was scored when evaluating the object according to the parameter under study by all respondents in the aggregate.

Step 2. Calculation of the average value of the value.

If K respondents participated in the survey, then the average value of the value is calculated by the formula:

n=M*K, since the studied quality is evaluated by K respondents in the developed form M times (in M pairs of antonymous adjectives). The average value of X serves as an indicator of the overall assessment of a given quality of an object by the whole class, being at the same time a fairly objective characteristic, since it allows leveling the influence of subjective factors (for example, the bias of individual respondents in relation to this object at the time of the survey).

Step 3. Calculation of standard deviation.

The standard deviation serves as an indicator of the measure of dispersion of the values of a quantity around its mean value X, i.e. measures of unanimity, cohesion of respondents in assessing this quality of the object. The standard deviation is calculated as the square root of the variance y x \u003d vD x, where the variance D x, in turn, is calculated by the formula:

The described three steps of mathematical processing of diagnostic data reveal a picture of the perception of the objects under study by the respondents. This allows you to visualize the results of the analysis.

The data obtained after the above processing can be compared with each other by calculating their correlation. This stage of processing aims to establish the extent to which the attitude of the respondents to the object is associated with its individual characteristics.

Step 4. Calculation of the correlation of the obtained estimates.

When determining the correlation coefficient, firstly, the average value of the estimates of each of the indicators for all evaluated objects is calculated. Suppose a respondent evaluates n objects. By activity, the 1st object was evaluated by the average value of A j . Then the average score of indicator A of all objects:

The average score of the indicator P:

Then the correlation coefficient A and P r A,P:

(covariance); , - standard deviations of the values A j and O j from their average values, which are found as follows:

As a result of calculating the correlation of assessments, one can clearly see the psychological mechanism for constructing the ratio of respondents' assessments to the objects under study.

Stage 3. Presentation of the location of the tested brands in the semantic space.

After the stage of mathematical processing, several main factors can be identified and the location of the tested brands in the semantic space formed by the identified latent factors can be imagined.

As a result, the results turn out to be quite visual and fairly easy to interpret: the figure shows that the ideal product must be of high quality and reasonable price (quite obvious properties are selected for clarity of the example). According to the quality factor, brands 1 and 2 are closest to the ideal product, and 4 and 5 according to the price factor. Evaluating the set of criteria, we can conclude that brand 1 is closest to the ideal.

Similarly, you can test, for example, variants of names, choosing the names that evoke the most positive emotions, while being associated with a specific product and evoking an image, an association with the corresponding valuable qualities.

Interesting results can be obtained by comparing products that do not compete with each other, but have a similar basis, which makes comparison possible and helps to identify new positively evaluated qualities of a product, brand and transfer them to a new product field (invention for use).

For example, the assessment of plastic cards in general, in order to understand what features of fuel plastic cards need to be developed, and the use of which would help in capturing the fuel card market.

The semantic differential technique allows, when studying a brand, to identify an emotional attitude towards it (affective component of attitude), not burdened by rationalizing motives (cognitive aspect). Reveal how the potential consumer feels about the brand, i.e. predict his real behavior, not words about actions.

The semantic differential allows you to draw statistically significant conclusions on small samples (sufficient material can be collected on 3-5 homogeneous focus groups) due to the fact that the unit of analysis is not the respondent, but the assessment (on average, each respondent evaluates 7-10 objects of 15 -25 scales, i.e. gives 100-250 ratings).

The SD method makes it possible to reveal the structure of latent factors, criteria on the basis of which respondents construct assessments of various brands. Accordingly, using the SD method, it is possible to build a map of the placement of brands of interest in the structure of factors, while obtaining a clear, relatively easily interpretable research result.

The use of an “ideal” object in the SD methodology, along with the tested brands, makes it possible to determine the desired development directions, possible threats to the brand, the most significant (although sometimes unconscious by the consumer) properties of the product.

The use of the SD methodology in marketing research makes it possible to evaluate a brand and its elements (name, packaging, corporate identity, etc.), obtaining statistically significant estimates of the deep structures of consumers' consciousness in the course of a relatively inexpensive and small-scale study.

Target: get acquainted with the method of quantitative and qualitative indexing of values and perform exercises to master the method.

Basic theoretical provisions

According to Ch. Osgood, the method of semantic differential (SD) allows you to measure connotative meaning, i.e., the states that arise between the perception of a stimulus-stimulus and meaningful work with them. The connotative indicates something subjective, individual and valuable, opposed denotative - objective, interpersonal, cognitive. The concept of “personal meaning”, proposed by A. N. Leontiev, can be considered an analogue of the concept of “connotative meaning” in Russian psychology.

Being a method of experimental semantics, SD, along with other methods (for example, associative experiment, subjective scaling) is used to construct subjective semantic spaces, and is widely used in sociology, general and social psychology. Referring to it in psychological research is justified when it comes to, for example, the emotional attitude of an individual to certain objects, stereotypes, social representations, social categorization, attitudes are studied, value orientations, subjective-personal meaning are considered, and implicit theories of personality are revealed. .

SD refers to the methods of studying the case, because it allows you to penetrate into the unique context of an individual's life. The method was developed by a group of American researchers led by Ch. Osgood, who considered it as a combination of controlled association procedures and scaling. The SD method attracted the attention of domestic psychologists as early as the late 1970s. and, as A. M. Etkind rightly noted, “it has long been included in our psychological education programs.”

In order to determine the dimensionality of the semantic space, Ch. Osgood proposed using the method of factor analysis to establish the minimum number of orthogonal dimensions, or axes. Semantic differentiation, according to Osgood, implies a consistent location of a concept in a multidimensional semantic space through one or another value between the poles on the scales. The difference in the meanings of two concepts is a function of the multidimensional distance between the two points corresponding to these concepts.

Any concept at the operational level can be represented as a point in the semantic space. This point in the semantic space can be characterized by two parameters: direction and distance from the reference point (in other words, quality and intensity). The direction is determined by the choice of one or another quality, and the distance depends on the selected value on the scale. The higher the intensity of the reaction, the more significant the evaluated concept for the subject. Thus, each concept can be assessed by a set of differentiating assessments on bipolar scales.

For differentiation, the subject is offered a concept (a number of concepts), as well as a set of bipolar scales given by adjectives. The respondent must give an assessment of the differentiable object on each of the proposed bipolar seven-point scales. In response to the word, the respondent has a certain reaction, which reveals a certain similarity with the behavioral reaction, a kind of readiness for behavior, something mediating behavior. The respondent's associations with the stimulus are guided by predetermined bipolar scales. The functions of these scales are as follows: firstly, they help to verbalize the response to a particular stimulus, secondly, they help to focus on certain properties of this stimulus that are of interest to the study, and finally, with their help, it opens up the possibility of comparing ratings given by different respondents various objects.

Estimated object



								Slow
Small
Passive								Active

Selecting a value of 0 means neutral, 1 means lowthe stump of this quality in the assessed object, 2 - medium degree, 3 - high.

The scales are presented in random order, i.e. the scales of one factor should not be grouped into blocks. The poles of the scales should not create in the respondent the attitude that the left pole always corresponds to a negative quality, and the right pole - to a positive one. The subject is presented with all scaled objects at the same time, and then it is proposed to sequentially evaluate them in the corresponding columns, i.e., each of them is placed on a separate page with the corresponding scales.

In the geometric representation, the semantic space can be denoted by the axes, which are factors (there are three of them: assessment, strength and activity), and the connotative meanings of objects are coordinate points or vectors.

Osgood scaled concepts from various fields and, having carried out factor and variance analysis, identified the leading factors (evaluation, potency, activity - EPA). The evaluation factor in this study played a major role, it explained 68.6% of the total variance, while the activity factor accounted for 15.5% and the strength factor accounted for 12.7%. The factor structure "assessment - strength - activity" defines a universal semantic field, which can be used to describe the world of a person's subjective relations to the elements of his environment.

Evaluation factor united the scales: bad - good, beautiful - ugly, sweet - sour, clean - dirty, tasty - tasteless, useful - useless, good - evil, pleasant - unpleasant, sweet - bitter, cheerful - sad, divine - secular, fragrant - smelly , honest - dishonest, fair - unfair.

Strength Factor: big - small, strong - weak, heavy - light, thick - thin.

Activity factor: fast - slow, active - passive, hot - cold, sharp - blunt, round - angular.

It is possible to analyze the obtained data not only using the factor analysis procedure, but also the formula proposed by C. Osgood, according to which the distance between the scaling objects, i.e., two points in the semantic space, is calculated. After all, scaled objects can be represented as semantic profiles: broken lines connecting the choices of subjects on each bipolar scale (Fig.).

d (x 1 , y 1) - the difference between the coordinates of two points that represent the values of objects X and V by the factor.

This formula makes it possible to estimate the distances between the values of different concepts in the same individual or group of individuals, to compare the assessments of the same object by respondents, and, finally, to identify changes in the assessments of any object of one subject or group.

SD is a method that makes it possible to obtain the required information without using standard objects and standard scales. This implies that “there is no “SD test” as such”, depending on the goals of a particular study, certain objects and certain scales are selected that are representative and relevant to the goals. In addition, the researcher is encouraged to choose scales that are adequate in each individual case. For example, a person is more difficult to evaluate on a scale of "sweet - sour", but more accessible on a scale of "useful - useless". And for respondents who do not have special knowledge in the field of psychology or psychiatry, the "talkative - silent" scale will be more understandable than the "manic - depressive" scale. Each factor should be represented by several pairs of scales.

When scaling a narrow set of concepts, the three-dimensional space “assessment - strength - activity” is transformed and becomes one-dimensional or two-dimensional, i.e. the number of independent factors decreases to two or one. It is also possible to increase the factors that describe the semantic multidimensional space of an individual or group in relation to the assessment of an object.

Such variants of SD are called private, in contrast to the universal - three-dimensional, formed by three factors "assessment - strength - activity". If the universal SD allows to obtain generalized emotional-evaluative forms of classification, then the private SD - classifications on a narrower (denotative) basis. Applying a universal SD on different populations, we will get three independent factors “assessment - strength - activity”, and when using a private SD, we need to build private semantic spaces every time we are dealing with a new group of respondents.

A variant of private SD is personal SD, when bipolar or unipolar scales are set in terms of personal characteristics (personality and character traits). The procedure for personal SD is similar to the universal one: a number of objects are evaluated on a number of scales. The object of evaluation in this case may be the respondent or other people. The data obtained are subjected to factor analysis, as a result, factors are identified that reflect the ordinary theory of the individual's personality.

Test questions

What basic mental phenomena are subject to study by the semantic differential?

What other methods of experimental psychosemantics do you know?

What is the semantic space of the subject?

What three orthogonal directions study the semantic field of the subjects in the semantic differential?

Is it possible to study the similarity or difference in the semantic profiles of different people using SD?

What other types of the semantic differential method exist besides the universal one?

To practice the use of a one-dimensional partial semantic differential, perform the following exercises in the sequence suggested below.

Exercise 1. Conducting the first phase of the study. The purpose of this phase of the study is to select a research topic. To do this, use the group discussion method to select one object or mental manifestation, the opinions of students about which you need to study. For example, 1) the characteristics of a typical scientist, 2) the basic properties of consciousness, etc.

Using the elements of the focus group method, highlight the main characteristics or properties of the object. To do this, everyone writes down 7-9 characteristics for 5 minutes, then they are spoken aloud in a group and entered into a general list. Characteristics (at least 7) that have gained a greater number of repetitions become the basis for creating SD scales.

In the case of studying the opinions of respondents of various samples (and not just students of this group) about the object under study, interviews or questionnaires can be conducted to collect data that allow the formation of SD scales.

Exercise 2. The purpose of the second stage is to compile a private SD to study respondents' assessments of the characteristics or properties of the object under study. A. Compile bipolar scales of private DM based on the characteristics obtained in the first step. B. Use the standard instruction (the full version of Ch. Osgood's instruction is given in the appendix) or formulate your own based on it. C. Conduct an assessment of the characteristics on the basis of the created private SD. D. Draw lines linking your choices across all characteristics - create an individual semantic profile.

Exercise 3 The third stage of the study serves to create a group semantic profile. To do this, calculate the average group ratings (per group) for each characteristic, write them down on the board, and then transfer these values to your notebooks and overlay them on your individual semantic profile.

Exercise 4 Assess the degree of similarity or difference between the individual and group semantic profile. To do this, use the formula from the theoretical provisions. Explain the results obtained and draw conclusions about the degree of similarity or difference between group opinions and your own about the object under study.

The semantic differential method was developed in the 1950s by American scientists under the leadership of C. Osgood. At the moment, many applications have been found for it in various fields. This method is a tool for studying the semantic spaces of the subject and serves to index values using bipolar scales defined by two opposite adjectives, between which there are three, five or seven gradations of the degree of occurrence of a given quality. Any object, phenomenon or feeling perceived by an individual evokes in him any reactions that can be successfully characterized using the methods of semantic differential. These methods allow you to see the image that arises in the mind of the recipient when evaluating an object.

It can be considered as a kind of projective tests that take into account the fact that a certain stimulating situation acquires meaning not only due to its objective content, but also for reasons related to the characteristics of the recipient himself - inclinations, drives, beliefs - that he attaches to this situation. . Simply put, the individual traits of the subject seem to be projected onto situations, reflected in the test results. This method allows you to measure the connotative meaning - the state following the perception of the stimulus symbol and preceding operations with symbols. The connotative meaning is directly related to the personal qualities of the recipient, such as social attitudes, stereotypes, etc., and is close to us in terms of the concept of personal meaning.

As mentioned earlier, objects in the semantic differential method are evaluated on a number of opposite (bipolar) graduated scales. The extreme values of these scales are antonyms. Estimates of concepts on different scales interact with each other, which makes it possible to single out bundles of such strongly interacting scales and group them into factors. This mechanism, which explains the grouping of scales together, was considered by Osgood to be synesthesia. Synesthesia is a phenomenon when, when one sense organ is irritated due to its specific sensations, sensations corresponding to another sense organ arise. An example is the case when, looking at an object, any taste sensations may arise.

When the transition from signs to factors is carried out, this is already the construction of a semantic space, which in some way is a metalanguage for describing values. Osgood in his research built a semantic space based on the gradation of various conceptual classes (for example, father, ice, table).

Three main factors are derived

"grade" ( light-dark, ppleasant-unpleasant);
"strength" ( strong-fragile, strong-weak);
"activity" ( fast-slow,active-passive).

All these factors together form a semantic space.

The method of semantic psychological differential, developed by Osgood, allows you to study not only the meaning of words, but also their emotional coloring, since the identified factors made it possible to study in more detail the structure of a person's (or a group of people's) thinking.

Numerous further studies in this area only confirmed the universality of the identified structures. The identity of factor structures in people of different nationalities, nationalities, people with different levels of education and mental health was shown. An important conclusion follows from this - since the structure of spaces is identical for different subjects, the results of factorization obtained on one group of people can be used on another group of subjects.

Somewhat later, Bentler and Lavoye expanded the semantic space by adding such factors as "reality", "density", "orderliness" and "ordinary" to "strength", "activity" and "assessment".

Using the materials of Russian vocabulary, a group of scientists identified the following factors: "assessment", "orderliness", "complexity", "activity", "strength" and a specific factor - "comfort".

Below we consider several types of semantic differentials.

Non-verbal semantic differential

In addition to scales using antonyms, Osgood made attempts to use graphic oppositions instead. The subjects were offered pairs of any geometric shapes such as: a black circle - a white circle, an up arrow - a down arrow. After that, they were called various words, and they had to choose a figure from the proposed pair, in their opinion, more suitable for this word. For example, for the word “happy”, most of the participants in the experiment pointed to images of something colored, sharp, clear. This experiment showed a high level of universality. Practical applications of the non-verbal semantic differential can be found in visual thinking research.

Private semantic differentials

For some individual conceptual classes (private), when the differential technique was built, the emergence of new factors specific to these conceptual classes was demonstrated. An example is the scaling of political terminology, as a result of which the factors - "estimation", "strength", "activity" - which are usually independent of each other, have merged together. They could be described as follows: "benevolent dynamism" - "evil impotence." Therefore, private semantic differentials are characterized by a different number of factors. According to Osgood, there is an interaction between concepts and scales in making a judgment.

Personal Semantic Differentials

Among private semantic spaces, there is a variety called the personal differential, built on adjectives that describe various qualities, both of others around people and of oneself. The procedure for constructing such a semantic differential is not remarkable. A person is taken as a subject (a real person or a movie character) and is evaluated on a bipolar scale of opposing adjectives.

Portal for the student. Self-training

The study used a semantic differential. Some typical scales

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents

Semantic differential and graphic rating scale

Basic theoretical provisions

Portal for the student. Self-training

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents

Semantic differential and graphic rating scale

Basic theoretical provisions

RELATED ARTICLES