Abstract

The choice of measuring scales and their numenclatures are critical but should be influenced by the research objectives. In this research, adopting the 'content analysis study' approach, the 'mirror image' variant of the Likert scale, was used to critique the results from earlier research that used the standard Likert scale 1-5, where each unit was allocated linear positive integers. The focus was to evaluate the impact on the results of consensus-reaching proecsses (CRPs) used for addressing a group decision-making (GDM) problem among professionals in the built environment and can be adapted for use in the implementation of AI in conservative industries. The two measuring scales were identified as Scales 1 and 2, where Scale 1 is the standard Likert scale and Scale 2 is the mirror image scale. The results revealed that the outcome of Scale 1 progressively reduced the chosen factors, from twenty-one to thirteen and twelve. Similarly, the second scale, drastically reduced the same factors to nine and eight respectively. The emerging twelve factors from Scale 1 aptly represented the interests of the different professionals that participated in the exercise, compared to the eight factors from Scale 2. Thus, the former provides more suitable solutions to the GDM problem.

Keyword: Consensus reaching processes, Group decision-making, Measuring scales, Professionals, Research objectives.