Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hogan, T. P.
Right arrow Articles by Brezinski, K. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reliability Methods: A Note on the Frequency of Use of Various Types

Thomas P. Hogan

hogant1{at}uofs.edu

Amy Benjamin

Kristen L. Brezinski

University of Scranton

This study examined the frequency of use of various types of reliability coefficients for a systematically drawn sample of 696 tests appearing in the APA-published Directory of Unpublished Experimental Mental Measures. Almost all articles included some type of reliability report for at least one test administration. Coefficient alpha was the over-whelming favorite among types of coefficients. Several measures treated almost universally in psychological-testing textbooks were rarely or never used. Problems encountered in the study included ambiguous designations of types of coefficients, reporting reliability based on a study other than the one cited, inadequate information about subscales, and simply incorrect recording of the information given in an original source.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 60, No. 4, 523-531 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/00131640021970691
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Psychoeducational AssessmentHome page
K. L. Slaney, M. Tkatchouk, S. M. Gabriel, and M. D. Maraun
Psychometric Assessment and Reporting Practices: Incongruence Between Theory and Practice
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, December 1, 2009; 27(6): 465 - 476.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
N. G. Waller
Commingled Samples: A Neglected Source of Bias in Reliability Analysis
Applied Psychological Measurement, May 1, 2008; 32(3): 211 - 223.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
J. M. Hernandez, V. J. Rubio, J. Revuelta, and J. Santacreu
A Procedure for Estimating Intrasubject Behavior Consistency
Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 2006; 66(3): 417 - 434.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
M. Brunner and H.-M. SUss
Analyzing the Reliability of Multidimensional Measures: An Example from Intelligence Research
Educational and Psychological Measurement, April 1, 2005; 65(2): 227 - 240.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
T. P. Hogan and J. Agnello
An Empirical Study of Reporting Practices Concerning Measurement Validity
Educational and Psychological Measurement, October 1, 2004; 64(5): 802 - 812.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
A. L. Shields and J. C. Caruso
A Reliability Induction and Reliability Generalization Study of the Cage Questionnaire
Educational and Psychological Measurement, April 1, 2004; 64(2): 254 - 270.
[Abstract] [PDF]