Relevance & Research Question: Rating scales (e.g., agree-disagree scales) can be implemented in different ways. Besides standard HTML radio buttons there are different graphical rating scales available. This study focuses on slider scales (e.g., Funke, Reips & Thomas, 2011) and visual analogue scales (VAS, e.g., Couper et al., 2006), two scales that differ in the way they are operated. VAS and radio buttons are operated by clicking only, which makes a marker appear on the previously empty scale. Slider scales consist of a handle that is visible in the beginning and has to be moved. There are different possible implementations: Sliders can either be operated by sliding only or by a combination of sliding and clicking. This study is aimed at identifying the best of implementing way graphical rating scales.

Methods & Data: The sample consisted of N = 4180 respondents that were randomly assigned to a questionnaire consisting of either radio buttons, slide-only sliders, click and slide sliders, or VAS. As the actual use could also depend on the respondent’s device, a comparison between desktop computers (N = 1406), smart phones (N = 1372), and tablets (N = 1402) was made. As second experimental factor the response scale consisted either of 5, 7, or 11 options.

Results: Item nonresponse was highest with sliders (7.3% and 7.7%) followed by VAS (5.5%) and it was lowest with radio buttons (3.8%). Especially respondents with a low formal education produced missing data with sliders that could only be slid but not clicked on. No difference was found in mean ratings, response time, and evaluation of the questionnaire. The way sliders were operated did affect the results. The number of response options did not affect the results systematically.

Added Value: Overall, higher rates of item nonresponse argue against the use of slider scales, especially against those that can only be operated by sliding. Overall, it is recommended to use radio buttons or VAS as graphical rating scales.