Snakes versus ladders: A validation of laddering technique as a measure ofhierarchical structure

Laddering technique has become a widely applied method for accessing supero rdinate or core constructs in personal meaning systems since its introducti on by Hinkle in 1965. In spite of this popularity, however, few efforts hav e been made to validate the technique, and some critics have begun to quest ion whether it actually converges on more abstract core features of a respo ndent's construct system. To address these concerns, we conducted laddering interviews with a diverse group of 103 university students, analyzing the structure, process, and content of the ladders they produced. Evidence gene rally supported the method's validity. More concrete prompts required more hierarchical levels to converge on core themes, and theoretically more taci t or preverbal superordinate constructs were rated as more difficult to put into words, required longer latency to do so, and were considered more imp ortant to respondents than subordinate constructs from the same ladders. Fu rthermore, a content analysis of the ladders indicated that superordinate c onstructs more frequently reflected central existential themes of purpose a nd meaning, whereas subordinate constructs more commonly reflected more sup erficial attitudes and interests. We concluded by providing descriptive dat a on various patterns of laddering structure (e.g., self/preferred-self dis crepancy, crossover conflict) in this large sample of nonclinical ladders, and offered 10 practical recommendations to assist future users of the meth od to do so more artfully.