Consistency of Factor Structure on the Semantic Differential: An Analysis of Three Adult Samples

Abstract

Piotrowski (1983a, 1984) reported on variance in Osgood's (1957) formulation of three dimensions of semantic space on the semantic differential technique with a fifth grade sample. The current study was concerned with the consistency of factor structure in three adult samples using three different concepts: THE UNIVERSITY OF WEST FLORIDA, DEATH, and MYSELF. Results indicated consistency for the predicted Evaluation dimension (Factor I) and moderate consistency for both Potency and Activity dimensions across the three samples. However, some scales tended to be loaded significantly on more than one factor; this was particularly evident for the Evaluation dimension in that several non-Evaluative scales at times weighted on Factor I. Although the findings indicated a slight increase in factor invariance when compared to Piotrowski's earlier work with children, researchers are still cautioned to subject their semantic differential data to factorial methods so as to enhance the validity of their results.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Burns, R. (1976). The concept-scale interaction problem: A trap for the unwary on the semantic differential. Educational Studies, 2, 121-127.

Keller, J. W. , Piotrowski, C. , and Sherry, D. (1982). Perceptions of the college environment and campus life: The Black experience. Journal of Non-white Concerns in Personnel and Guidance, 10, 126-132.

Klemmack, D. L. and Ballweg, J. A. (1973). Concept-scale interaction with the semantic differential technique. Journal of Psychology, 84, 345-352.

Liebowitz, E. (1976). Semantic discrimination of self-made-related words. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 43, 499-506.

Malhotra, N. K. (1981). A scale to measure self-concepts, person concepts, and product concepts. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 456-464.

Osgood, C. E. , Suci, G. J. , and Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Piotrowski, C. (1983a). Factor structure on the semantic differential as a function of method of analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 283-288.

Piotrowski, C. (1983b). Reliability of the semantic differential used by children: Evaluation of the evaluative dimension. Psychological Reports, 52, 24-26.

Piotrowski, C. and Dunham, F. Y. (1984). Stability of factor structure on the semantic differential: Retest data. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44, 449-454.

10.

Presly, A. S. (1969). Concept-scale interaction in the semantic differential and its implications for factor scores. British Journal of Psychology, 60, 109-113.

11.

Snider, J. G. and Osgood, C. E. (Eds.). (1969). Semantic differential technique. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

12.

Tzeng, O. C. S. (1977). Individual differences in self-conception: A multivariate approach. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 45, 1119-1124.