A Comparison of Normalized and Non-Normalized Multiplicative Subjective Importance Weighting in Quality of Life Measurem
- PDF / 666,198 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 76 Downloads / 187 Views
A Comparison of Normalized and Non‑Normalized Multiplicative Subjective Importance Weighting in Quality of Life Measurement Chang‑ming Hsieh1 · Qiguang Li2 · Houchao Lyu3 Accepted: 25 July 2020 © Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract In quality of life (QOL) studies, importance weighting generally refers to the incorporation of perceived importance as a weighting factor into measures of QOL. Although there are issues with multiplicative scores (multiplying satisfaction and importance scores), the use of multiplicative scores as a method of non-normalized importance weighting remains common. In addition, researchers have suggested assessing importance weighting by inspecting life domains individually (i.e., within-domain perspective). Analyzing survey data from a sample of 328 Chinese adults, we (1) compared the non-normalized importance weighting method (multiplicative scores) and the normalized linear importance weighting method and showed that they not only represented different concepts but also produced different empirical results for importance weighting, (2) provided empirical evidence demonstrating the problems of assessing importance weighting from a withindomain perspective, and (3) presented the alternative variables to be included in regression analysis to assess normalized liner importance weighting. Keywords Life satisfaction · Happiness · Subjective well-being · Domain importance · Importance weighting · Domain weighting
1 Introduction About two decades ago, Trauer and Mackinnon (2001) underscored the major issues with the use of multiplicative scores (multiplying satisfaction and importance scores) in quality of life (QOL) measurement. The main issue of multiplicative scores, as Trauer and Mackinnon (2001) and others (e.g., Hsieh 2012a, b; Russell and Hubley 2005) pointed out, has to do with the meaning or conceptual ambiguity of multiplicative scores. Multiplying * Chang‑ming Hsieh [email protected] 1
Jane Addams College of Social Work, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1040 West Harrison Street (MC 309), Chicago, IL 60607‑7134, USA
2
Xi’an Jiaotong University City College, Xi’an, China
3
Southwest University, Chongqing, China
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
C. Hsieh et al.
scores of two different concepts (i.e., satisfaction and importance) leads to a product that does not have a clear conceptual meaning. Since satisfaction and importance are not the same constructs (e.g., Russell et al. 2006), the fact that individuals with different ratings of satisfaction and importance end up receiving the same weighted score is confusing. A multiplicative score could be considered a satisfaction-weighted importance score as much as an importance-weighted satisfaction score (e.g., Hagell and Westergren 2006). The use of multiplicative scores creates conceptual ambiguity and interpretational difficulties. The conceptual ambiguity associated with multiplicative scores is reflected in the fact that individuals with different combinations of satisfaction and importance scores can have the same multiplicative sc
Data Loading...
