Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Split-half reliability (Spearman- Brown Prophecy) and Cronbach Alpha are popular estimates of this reliability. [5] (D) Parallel Form Reliability: It is an estimate of consistency between two different instruments of measurement. The inter-correlation between two parallel forms of a test or scale is used as an estimate of parallel form reliability.
Splitting the test in half; Correlating scores on one half of the test with scores on the other half of the test; The correlation between these two split halves is used in estimating the reliability of the test. This halves reliability estimate is then stepped up to the full test length using the Spearman–Brown prediction formula.
The Wide Range Achievement Test, currently in its fifth edition (WRAT5), is an achievement test which measures an individual's ability to read words, comprehend sentences, spell, and compute solutions to math problems. [1] The test is appropriate for individuals aged 5 years through adult.
On average, IQ scores for this scale have been found quite stable across time (Janzen, Obrzut, & Marusiak, 2003). Internal consistency was tested by split-half reliability and was reported to be substantial and comparable to other cognitive batteries (Bain & Allin, 2005).
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.
"Progress in analyzing repeated-measures data and its reflection in papers published in the archives of general psychiatry." Archives of General Psychiatry, 61, 310–317. Huck, S. W. & McLean, R. A. (1975). "Using a repeated measures ANOVA to analyze the data from a pretest-posttest design: A potentially confusing task".
Measurement in psychology and physics are in no sense different. Physicists can measure when they can find the operations by which they may meet the necessary criteria; psychologists have to do the same. They need not worry about the mysterious differences between the meaning of measurement in the two sciences (Reese, 1943, p. 49). [9]