Feeling thermometer
[6] In addition, the feeling thermometer has a variety of applications in research to assist in understanding the burden of diseases and psychological states of people.
In 1921, Hayes and Patterson used the visual analog scale (VAS) method for the first time to measure and record the pain intensity of patients' medical issues.
[7] From its first inclusion in 1964, "feeling thermometer scales have been quite popular to measure attitudes towards politicians, groups, and public figures,"[9] thereby allowing for an expansion of the tool to reach wider audiences.
The questions asked aimed to remain neutral and unbiased, as with all feeling thermometers, only providing a statement and explaining how participants can rate it.
An extract of a survey question from the 1996 American National Election Study (ANES) is as follows; "In the list that follows, rate that person/party using something we call the feeling thermometer.
This progression has led to more recent accounts, from early 2021 to 2022, documenting the use of the feeling thermometer in gathering respondents' subjective thoughts towards vaccinated and unvaccinated people during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Additionally, case studies have been carried out to identify the burden of various diseases and the extent of pain an individual may be in, due to their medical condition or illness.
[20] The feeling thermometer was effective in measuring their health outcomes and provided "a quick and accurate assessment of the burden of Crohn's disease on patients"[3] which supported the other research tools used and identified common issues.
[20] As proven in the American National Election Surveys, feeling thermometers have also been a beneficial tool as a longitudinal study measure to estimate population changes over time.
A variation of the feeling thermometer has also become highly popular amongst psychologists and behavioural therapists to explore emotions of clients and help identify them.
Arguably, these directions can be interpreted in different ways by various individuals depending on their knowledge of the political topic being questioned, therefore limiting the ability to compare scores between people.
"People are not capable psychologically of making such fine distinctions of their own internal dispositions"[32] and individuals may have difficulty expressing their exact emotions, especially when in a medical review to rate their pain or discomfort.
[46][47] Since the president is "the focal point of the political system"[46] in the United States of America, analysis of people's specific feelings towards their overall leader is vital in understanding the general consensus.
[48][49] Additionally, the consistent use as a longitudinal study method, for example, in collecting ratings of presidential candidates "before and immediately after six elections (1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996),"[50] allow for detailed analysis and comparisons in society.
