There are two main considerations in this discussion. First, Likert`s scales are arbitrary. The value assigned to a Likert element has no objective numerical basis, either in terms of measurement theory, or on the scale (from which a distance metric can be determined). The value assigned to each Likert element is simply determined by the researcher who designs the survey, who makes the decision on the basis of a desired detail. However, according to the convention, Likert items are generally attributed to whole progressive positive values. Likert scales typically range from 2 to 10 – 3 or 5 are the most common.  In addition, this progressive scale structure is such that each consecutive Likert element is treated as an indication of a „better“ response than the previous value. (This may vary in cases where the reverse order of the Likert scale is required). Rensis Likert, the developer of the scale, said his name.   Some have claimed that Likert`s name is „one of the most mispronounced in the field“ because many people pronounce the name of the scale as /la.k`rt/LY-k`rt.  Moreover, since Likert scale-question uses a scale, people are not obligated to express an opinion or opinion, but to allow them to be neutral when they choose to do so. However, a major drawback in using Likert Scales is that respondents tend to either choose the most extreme option or not make a decision at all.
A good Scale of Likert, as above, will represent a symmetry of categories via a center with clearly defined language qualifiers. In the case of such a symmetrical scale, equidistant attributes are generally observed more clearly or, at the very least, deduced. If a Likert scale is symmetrical and equidistant, it behaves more like a measure of the interval. While a Likert scale is actually ordinal, if it is well represented, it can still bring a level measurement closer to interval. This can be beneficial, because if it has only been treated as an ordinal scale, some valuable information could be lost if the „distance“ between Likert`s articles was not available for review. The important idea is that the type of analysis that is appropriate depends on how the Likert scale was presented. The second, and perhaps most important, point is whether the „distance“ between the different categories of elements is equivalent and traditionally derived. In the five-point Likert element above, z.B. concludes that the „distance“ between Category 1 and Category 2 is the same as between categories 3 and 4. In terms of good research practice, an equidistant representation of the researcher is important; Otherwise, there may be a distortion in the analysis.
For example, it is unlikely that a four-point Likert element with the „arm,“ „average,“ „good“ and „very good“ categories will have all the equidistant categories, as there is only one category that can score below the average.