Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Inter-method reliability assesses the degree to which test scores are consistent when there is a variation in the methods or instruments used. This allows inter-rater reliability to be ruled out. When dealing with forms, it may be termed parallel-forms reliability. [6]
Cronbach's alpha (Cronbach's ), also known as tau-equivalent reliability or coefficient alpha (coefficient ), is a reliability coefficient and a measure of the internal consistency of tests and measures.
The name of this formula stems from the fact that is the twentieth formula discussed in Kuder and Richardson's seminal paper on test reliability. [1] It is a special case of Cronbach's α, computed for dichotomous scores. [2] [3] It is often claimed that a high KR-20 coefficient (e.g., > 0.90) indicates a homogeneous test. However, like ...
Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ, lowercase Greek kappa) is a statistic that is used to measure inter-rater reliability (and also intra-rater reliability) for qualitative (categorical) items. [1] It is generally thought to be a more robust measure than simple percent agreement calculation, as κ takes into account the possibility of the agreement ...
Until the development of tau-equivalent reliability, split-half reliability using the Spearman-Brown formula was the only way to obtain inter-item reliability. [4] [5] After splitting the whole item into arbitrary halves, the correlation between the split-halves can be converted into reliability by applying the Spearman-Brown formula.
Reliability is supposed to say something about the general quality of the test scores in question. The general idea is that, the higher reliability is, the better. Classical test theory does not say how high reliability is supposed to be. Too high a value for , say over .9, indicates redundancy of items.
A useful inter-rater reliability coefficient is expected (a) to be close to 0 when there is no "intrinsic" agreement and (b) to increase as the "intrinsic" agreement rate improves. Most chance-corrected agreement coefficients achieve the first objective. However, the second objective is not achieved by many known chance-corrected measures. [4]
By employing simulated D studies, it is therefore possible to examine how the generalizability coefficients (similar to reliability coefficients in Classical test theory) would change under different circumstances, and consequently determine the ideal conditions under which our measurements would be the most reliable.