Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

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 Dimitrov, D. M.
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: Arguments for Multiple Perspectives and Potential Problems with Generalization across Studies

Dimiter M. Dimitrov

Kent State University

The present article addresses reliability issues in light of recent studies and debates focused on psychometrics versus datametrics terminology and reliability generalization (RG) introduced by Vacha-Haase. The purpose here was not to moderate arguments presented in these debates but to discuss multiple perspectives on score reliability and how they may affect research practice, editorial policies, and RG across studies. Issues of classical error variance and reliability are discussed across models of classical test theory, generalizability theory, and item response theory. Potential problems with RG across studies are discussed in relation to different types of reliability, different test forms, different number of items, misspecifications, and confounding independent variables in a single RG analysis.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 62, No. 5, 783-801 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/001316402236878
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
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
R. E. Schumacker and E. V. Smith Jr.
A Rasch Perspective
Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 2007; 67(3): 394 - 409.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
J. S. Campbell, S. Pulos, M. Hogan, and F. Murry
Reliability Generalization of the Psychopathy Checklist Applied in Youthful Samples
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2005; 65(4): 639 - 656.
[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]