Explicit measures of sense of control are psychometrically robust: A systematic comparison of response scales

Using subjective reports to measure experienced sense of control has been criticized for low reliability, leading to the domination of implicit measures such as intentional binding and sensory attenuation. However, these methods are not always feasible to use and have their own share of problems. In the current study, we systematically investigated how the choice of response scale for subjective reports affects the validity and reliability of participants’ responses. We designed a computer task in which we manipulated the degree of objective control that participants had across trials. Participants reported their experienced sense of control after each trial. Across five experiments, we compared responses on five scales: a linear visual analogue scale (VAS), a percentage VAS, a 7-point Likert, a 4-point Likert, and a binary scale. In two additional experiments, we compared the directionality of the linear scale. The results were remarkably similar for all except the binary scale: participants demonstrated the tendency to underestimate their level of control, especially for intermediate levels of objective control, and the between-block reliability of responses indicated a very high level of reliability. In addition, we propose that our task can be used as a measure of individual differences and developed metrics that can be extracted from participants’ responses. Our findings demonstrate that contrary to the dominant opinion, explicit reports are characterized by high reliability, and we provide practical recommendations for the choice of a scale for measuring sense of control.