一维和污染尺度下系数Alpha及其替代方案的精度和灵敏度

IF 1.1 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Leifeng Xiao, K. Hau
{"title":"一维和污染尺度下系数Alpha及其替代方案的精度和灵敏度","authors":"Leifeng Xiao, K. Hau","doi":"10.1080/08957347.2023.2172016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We compared coefficient alpha with five alternatives (omega total, omega RT, omega h, GLB, and coefficient H) in two simulation studies. Results showed for unidimensional scales, (a) all indices except omega h performed similarly well for most conditions; (b) alpha is still good; (c) GLB and coefficient H overestimated reliability with small samples and short scales, and (d) sensitivity to scale quality reduced with longer scales. For contaminated scales, (a) all indices except omega h were reasonably unbiased with non-severe contamination; (b) alpha, omega total, and GLB were more sensitive in picking up contamination with shorter scales, whereas omega RT and omega h were not; and (c) coefficient H could not pick up contaminated items among high-quality items. For applied researchers, (a) supplementary information of scale characteristics helps choose the appropriate index; (b) comparing different scales with one golden standard is inappropriate; (c) omega h should not be used alone.","PeriodicalId":51609,"journal":{"name":"Applied Measurement in Education","volume":"36 1","pages":"31 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy and Sensitivity of Coefficient Alpha and Its Alternatives with Unidimensional and Contaminated Scales\",\"authors\":\"Leifeng Xiao, K. Hau\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08957347.2023.2172016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT We compared coefficient alpha with five alternatives (omega total, omega RT, omega h, GLB, and coefficient H) in two simulation studies. Results showed for unidimensional scales, (a) all indices except omega h performed similarly well for most conditions; (b) alpha is still good; (c) GLB and coefficient H overestimated reliability with small samples and short scales, and (d) sensitivity to scale quality reduced with longer scales. For contaminated scales, (a) all indices except omega h were reasonably unbiased with non-severe contamination; (b) alpha, omega total, and GLB were more sensitive in picking up contamination with shorter scales, whereas omega RT and omega h were not; and (c) coefficient H could not pick up contaminated items among high-quality items. For applied researchers, (a) supplementary information of scale characteristics helps choose the appropriate index; (b) comparing different scales with one golden standard is inappropriate; (c) omega h should not be used alone.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Measurement in Education\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"31 - 44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Measurement in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2023.2172016\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Measurement in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2023.2172016","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:在两项模拟研究中,我们将系数α与五种备选方案(ω-总量、ω-RT、ω-h、GLB和系数h)进行了比较。结果表明,对于一维尺度,(a)除ωh外的所有指数在大多数条件下表现相似;(b) 阿尔法仍然很好;(c) GLB和系数H高估了小样本和短尺度的可靠性,以及(d)对尺度质量的敏感性随着尺度的延长而降低。对于污染量表,(a)除omega h外的所有指数在非严重污染情况下都是合理无偏的;(b) α、ω-总量和GLB在较短尺度的污染中更敏感,而ω-RT和ω-h则不敏感;以及(c)系数H不能在高质量项目中拾取被污染的项目。对于应用研究者来说,(a)量表特征的补充信息有助于选择合适的指标;(b) 用一个黄金标准来比较不同的尺度是不合适的;(c) omega h不应单独使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy and Sensitivity of Coefficient Alpha and Its Alternatives with Unidimensional and Contaminated Scales
ABSTRACT We compared coefficient alpha with five alternatives (omega total, omega RT, omega h, GLB, and coefficient H) in two simulation studies. Results showed for unidimensional scales, (a) all indices except omega h performed similarly well for most conditions; (b) alpha is still good; (c) GLB and coefficient H overestimated reliability with small samples and short scales, and (d) sensitivity to scale quality reduced with longer scales. For contaminated scales, (a) all indices except omega h were reasonably unbiased with non-severe contamination; (b) alpha, omega total, and GLB were more sensitive in picking up contamination with shorter scales, whereas omega RT and omega h were not; and (c) coefficient H could not pick up contaminated items among high-quality items. For applied researchers, (a) supplementary information of scale characteristics helps choose the appropriate index; (b) comparing different scales with one golden standard is inappropriate; (c) omega h should not be used alone.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
13.30%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Because interaction between the domains of research and application is critical to the evaluation and improvement of new educational measurement practices, Applied Measurement in Education" prime objective is to improve communication between academicians and practitioners. To help bridge the gap between theory and practice, articles in this journal describe original research studies, innovative strategies for solving educational measurement problems, and integrative reviews of current approaches to contemporary measurement issues. Peer Review Policy: All review papers in this journal have undergone editorial screening and peer review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信