Godspeed scale
This is the most up to date version of this scale.
Construct Summary
The authors report that the scale was developed to measure “users’ perception of service robots” (p. 71) and “take the often-used concepts of anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, and perceived intelligence and perceived safety as starting points to propose a consistent set of five questionnaires for these concepts.” (p. 72)
Rating = 23%
| Check? | Guideline Item |
|---|---|
| ✓ | Is the construct defined? |
| ✓ | Does the final version of the items capture the construct as it has been defined by the authors? |
| ✖ | Is the item generation process discussed (e.g., literature review, Delphi method, crowd-sourcing)? |
| ✖ | Person to items 10:1 for the initial set of items? |
| ✖ | Did they perform an EFA, PCA, Rasch, or similar test to determine the item to factor relationship? |
| ✖ | Did they describe how they determined number of factors? |
| ✖ | Did they report the full initial set of items? |
| ✖ | Did they provide loadings (EFA) or item fits (Rasch) of all items? |
| ✖ | Is there a description of the item removal process (e.g., using infit/outfit, factor loading minimum value, or cross-loading values)? |
| ✓ | Did they list the final number of items included in the scale? |
| ✖ | Did they include a factor structure test (e.g., second EFA, CFA, DIF, test for unidimensionality when using Rasch, or similar)? |
| ✓ | Was a measure of reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha, McDonalds Omega_h or Omega_t, Tarkkonen’s Rho) reported? |
| ✖ | Was a test of validity (e.g., predictive, concurrent, convergent, discriminant) reported? |
Comments None
Reviewed by Experts ✓
Downloads
PAPER
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics, 1, 71-81.
PDF of scale as well as instructions for administration and scoring are not readily available. Check the paper for more details or email hriscaledatabase@gmail.com submit this information if you are the author of this scale.
Final Scale Items (24 total):
Semantic differential so each item is an endpoint separated by 1-5 response scale.
Anthropomorphism
fake/natural
machinelike/humanlike
unconscious/conscious
artificial/lifelike
moving rigidly/moving elegantly
Animacy
dead/alive
stagnant/lively
mechanical/organic
artificial/lifelike
inert/interactive
apathetic/responsive
Likeability
dislike/like
unfriendly/friendly
unkind/kind
unpleasant/pleasant
awful/nice
Perceived Intelligence
incompetent/competent
ignorant/knowledgeable
irresponsible/responsible
unintelligent/intelligent
foolish/sensible
Perceived Safety
anxious/relaxed
agitated/calm
quiescient/surprised