Measuring the Unmeasurable? Systematic Evidence on Scale Transformations in Subjective Survey Data

Ordered response scales are ubiquitous in economics, but their interpretation rests on an untested assumption: that numerical labels reflect equal psychological intervals. The contribution of this paper is to provide a systematic assessment of this linearity assumption, developing a general framework to quantify how easily empirical results can be overturned when it is relaxed. Using original experimental data, we show that respondents use survey scales in ways that deviate from linearity, but only mildly so. Focusing on wellbeing research, we then replicate 40,000+ coefficient estimates across more than 80 papers published in top economics journals. Coefficient signs are remarkably robust to the mild departures from linear scale-use we document experimentally. However, estimates of relative effect sizes, which are crucial for policy applications, are unreliable even under these modest non-linearities.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/3gmzy_v2
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Income, Poverty, and Inequality
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.60

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measuring the Unmeasurable? Systematic Evidence on Scale Transformations in Subjective Survey Data

Caspar Kaiser, Anthony Lepinteur
3 citations
Income, Poverty, and Inequality
12.60
article

Measuring the Unmeasurable? Systematic Evidence on Scale Transformations in Subjective Survey Data

Caspar Kaiser, Anthony Lepinteur
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Ordered response scales are ubiquitous in economics, but their interpretation rests on an untested assumption: that numerical labels reflect equal psychological intervals. The contribution of this paper is to provide a systematic assessment of this linearity assumption, developing a general framework to quantify how easily empirical results can be overturned when it is relaxed. Using original experimental data, we show that respondents use survey scales in ways that deviate from linearity, but only mildly so. Focusing on wellbeing research, we then replicate 40,000+ coefficient estimates across more than 80 papers published in top economics journals. Coefficient signs are remarkably robust to the mild departures from linear scale-use we document experimentally. However, estimates of relative effect sizes, which are crucial for policy applications, are unreliable even under these modest non-linearities.

University of Warwick
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Income, Poverty, and Inequality
12.60
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.