Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
The scores are the subject's responses to items on an instrument (e.g., a mail questionnaire). Observed scores may be broken down into two components: the true score plus the error score.
The error score, in turn, can be broken down into systematic error (non-random error reflects some systematic bias, as due, for instance, to the methodology used -- thus also called method error) and random error (due to random traits of the subjects.
This is also called trait error.
The greater the error component in relation to the true score component, the lower the reliability, which is the ratio of the true score to the total (true + error) score.
Reliability is used to measure the extent to which an item, scale, or instrument will yield the same score when administered in different times, locations, or populations, when the two administrations do not differ in relevant variables.
Reliability coefficients are forms of correlation coefficients. The forms of reliability below measure different dimensions of reliability and thus any or all might be used in a particular research project.
So
Multiple-item or multiple-observation scales are often developed to assess characteristics about individuals. One important element in deciding the value of such a scale is its reliability and validity. A number of methods can establish a scales reliability including test-retest, equivalent-forms, and internal consistency estimates of reliability.
With test-retest reliability, individuals are administered a measure on two occasions with some time interval between them. Equivalent-forms estimates are based on a similar methodology, except an equivalent form is administered on the second occasion rather than the same measure.
For either of these methods, the easiest way to compute a reliability coefficient is through the use of the Bivariate Correlation procedures. In these cases, the reliability estimate is the correlation between the scores obtained on the two occasions.
With an internal consistency estimate of reliability, individuals are measured on a single occasion using a scale with multiple parts.
The parts may be items on a paper-and-pencil measure, responses to questions from structured interview, multiple observations on an observational measure, or some other units of a measure that are summed to yield scale scores. For ease of discussion, we will frequently refer to items rather than describing the analyses in terms of all types of parts. The reliability procedure computes estimates of reliability based on the consistency among the items (parts). Here, well look at two internal consistency estimates,
split-half and coefficient alpha.
Split-half estimates and coefficient alpha may be used to estimate the reliability of the total score if a scale has multiple items and the multiple items are summed to obtain a total score.
If a measure consists of multiple scales, separate internal consistency estimates should be computed for each scale score. In some instances, you may need to transform one or more items (or whatever the parts are) on a measure prior to conducting the analyses so that the total score computed by the Reliability procedure is meaningful.
Well look at two types of applications, which vary depending on whether or how items are transformed:
No transformation of items. If the responses to these items are in the same metric, and if high scores on them represent high scores on the underlying construct, no transformations are required.
The Reliability Analysis procedure uses the untransformed item scores.
Reverse-scoring of some item scores. This is the case when all items on a measure use the same response scale, but high item scores represent either high or low scores on the underlying construct.
Low item scores that represent high scores on the construct need to be reverse-scaled. Such items are commonly found on attitude scales.
Both the split-half coefficient and coefficient alpha should range in value between 0 and 1.
Values close to 0 indicate that a measure has poor reliability, while values close to 1 suggest that the measure is reliable.
For coefficient alpha, every item is assumed to be equivalent to every other item.
All items should measure the same underlying dimension. Differences in responses should occur only as a function of measurement error. It is unlikely that this assumption is ever met completely, although with some measures it may be met approximately. To the extent that the equivalency assumption is violated, internal consistency estimates tend to underestimate reliability.
Assumption 3: An item or half test score is a sum of its true and its error scores
This assumption is necessary for an internal consistency estimate to reflect accurately a scale's reliability. It is difficult to know whether this assumption has been violated or not.
The output reports two alphas, alpha and standardized item alpha.
In this example, we are interested in the alpha. The only time that we would be interested in the standardized alpha is if the scale score is computed by summing item scores that have been standardized to have a uniform mean and standard deviation (such as zscores).
We chose this split to take into account the ordering of items (with one exception, no two adjacent items are included on the same half) as well as the two type of items, under control and expression items (2 items of one type and 3 of the other on a half). To compute a split-half coefficient, follow these steps: (1) Click Statistics, click Scale, then click Reliability Analysis. (2) Click Reset to clear the dialog box. (3) Hold down the cntl key, and click the variables that are in the first half: item!, item3, item5, item8, and item10. (4) Click to move them to the Items box. (5) Hold down the cntl key, and click on the variables that are in the second half: item2, item4, item6, item7, and item9. (6) Click ~ to move them to the Items box in the Reliability Analysis dialog box. (7) Click Statistics. (8) Click Item and Scale in the Descriptives for area. (9) Click Correlations in the Inter-Item area. (10) Click Continue. (11) Click Split-half in the drop-down menu in the Reliability Analysis dialog box. (12) Click OK.
If there were an odd number of items, a split would produce an unequal number of items in each half. Under these conditions, the value for the Unequal-length Spearman-Brown should be reported because it will likely differ from the Equal-length Spearman-Brown value.
APA-Style Results Section