Application of labelled magnitude satiety scale in a linguistically-diverse population M.K. Zalifah a, * , Delma R. Greenway a , Nola A. Caffin a , Bruce R. D’Arcy a , Michael J. Gidley b a School of Land, Crop and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia b Centre for Nutrition and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia article info Article history: Received 21 May 2007 Received in revised form 23 February 2008 Accepted 6 March 2008 Available online 14 March 2008 Keywords: Labelled magnitude scale Satiety Visual analogue scale Diverse populations abstract The labelled magnitude scale (LMS) has been found to provide better discrimination of satiety sensations compared to a visual analogue scale (VAS). The perception of satiety in a linguistically-diverse population may produce differences in the numerical ratios due to language acquisition and diversity. The objective of this study was to investigate whether LMS based on perceived intensities of satiety is an appropriate methodology for a linguistically-diverse population. A total of forty three subjects (28 female, 15 male) were asked to quantify the semantic meaning of 47 English words denoting hunger/fullness at various intensities. Forty four percent of the subjects had English as their first language (EFL sub-group) with the remainder having a first language other than English (EOL sub-group). Words with ambiguous eval- uation scores were removed and geometric means (GM) were calculated for each remaining words. Ele- ven final anchoring words were chosen for the bi-polar linear scale and the scale was constructed by setting the GM to +100 and À100 for each extreme. The types of words removed due to ambiguity dif- fered between the two sub-groups as some words had no equivalent in some of the first languages of the EOL sub-group e.g. ravenous and voracious. The scale constructed was asymmetrical with phrases such as extremely full/hungry and very full/hungry located near to negative/positive ends of the linear scale. Phrases such as moderately full/hungry and slightly full/hungry were located within the central zone of the scale. Quantification of the semantic meaning of hunger/fullness words was not significantly different between sub-groups for the eleven phrases chosen as anchor. We conclude that, provided ambiguous words are avoided, labelled magnitude scales in English can be utilised to assess the percep- tion of perceived satiety in a diverse population differing in their first language. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The visual analogue scale (VAS) or category scale (CS) have tra- ditionally been used to quantify perception and ratings in most studies conducted to assess human satiety. Most VASs are linear scales with no specific intervals along the line but maximum or minimum anchors on each end. Holt, Miller, Petocz, and Farmaka- lidis (1995) used a VAS to assess satiety for 48 common foods with equally spaced intervals anchored verbally to describe the feeling of satiety. Lasagna (1960) in a study on pain showed that the descriptors of a variable are not equally spaced in category or graphic rating scales. Another study by Huskisson et al. (1974) using a VAS to measure pain intensity also showed unequal intervals between the pain descriptors used. Unequal intervals may well occur when assessing descriptors denoting satiety because evaluations are nor- mally conducted over a prescribed period of time during which the feeling of satiety increases, reaches a peak and then diminishes gradually over time. To obtain a better quantitative estimate of the intensity of a variable, a labelled magnitude scale (LMS) has been used by many researchers. Most scales used to measure intensity are either anchored with maximum intensity or with intensity labels located empirically. The scale developed by Green et al. (1996) was the first scale devised using empirical intensity la- bels as well as a maximum intensity adjective or adverb anchored at each end of the scale. The development of LMS was pioneered by Green and his col- leagues when they studied somatosensation and gustation (Green, Shaffer, & Gilmore, 1993). The major difference in LMS compared to VAS or CS is the unequal quasi-logarithmic space intervals of the verbal descriptors anchored with a ‘‘strongest imaginable” variable at the upper limit. Green et al. (1996) tested the use of LMS for a specific taste or smell. It was found that the LMS is a valid alterna- tive tool to magnitude estimation (ME) to measure perceived inten- sity of gustatory, olfactory and chemaesthetic sensations. However, it is not obvious that the LMS is also valid in other domains such as self-perception of organism status e.g. satiety. Schutz and Cardello (2001) further assessed the semantic meanings of liking and disliking while constructing a LMS in com- parison to the existing 9-point hedonic scale. Individuals and groups of people have varied sensory/hedonic perception and do 0950-3293/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.03.001 * Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 424 514 961. E-mail address: zalifah_uq@yahoo.com (M.K. Zalifah). Food Quality and Preference 19 (2008) 574–578 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Food Quality and Preference journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodqual