LOCUS OF CONTROL ORIENTATION AND LEVEL - Drake University

than previous scaling techniques. Magnitude scaling provides interval-level data
(Bums & Grove, 1987).
McGuire (1984) ~roPQsd that VAS was best suited for measurement of
clinical pain (acute/chronic or progressive). She documented an advantage of
the VAS over a visual descriptor scale (VDS) as the avoidance of forced word
choice and artificial categorization that in turn may be a more sensitive mmure.
McGuire (1984) summarized the reliability of the VAS instrument as ",goodm
and the validity as "probable" (p. 155). This review also cited the VAS as one
of the easiest tools to understand and quickest to score. Banos, Bosch,
Canellas, Bossofs, Ortega, and Bigorra (1989) studied the acceptability of the
VAS for pain measurement in the clinical setting and stated that among the
potential methods useful in pain assessment, the visual analogue scales were
commonly considered more sensitive and accurate than other rating scales.
The reliability of the VAS was investigated by Revill, Robinson, Rosen
and Hogg (1976) utilizing the test-retest method. Revill et al. asked subjects to
rate a distant pain event in 5 minutes and then in 24 hours. The researchers
reported correlations of those repeated measures of .95 to .99. Wewers and
Lowe (1990) found the interrater reliability of the VAS to be -99. This
csefficient represents the reliability of the investigator's ability to score the VAS
and not the ability of the subject to utilize the tool.
utilizing an
construct validity of the VAS was determined by Seymour (1982)
manipulations approach. Seymour determined the tool
to be sensitive in discerning the decrease in dental pain after the administration
of analgesia.