A test of the form-resistant correlation hypothesis: Ratings, rankings, and the measurement of values

A number of researchers have argued that ranking techniques are more appropriate than rating methods for the measurement of values in surveys. The form-resistant correlation hypothesis proposes that observed associations among values and between values and other variables should remain invariant across measurement methods. However, some recent research on parental values for child qualities suggests that ratings and rankings produce different correlational results. The present study tests the hypothesis that discrepancies between rating and ranking results are due to the fact that, when responding to rating questions, some respondents avoid making difficult choices between valued qualities by rating all the qualities as highly and equally desirable. Consistent with this hypothesis, when nondifferentiating respondents are removed from the analyzed sample, the substantive results of analyses of rating data resemble the results typically obtained using ranking data. This suggests that ranking may be the superior method for measuring values.