The restrictive assumption of classical parallelism for the Spearman-Brown formulas makes them obsolete when the two-part alpha and coefficient alpha formulas can be used. The alpha coefficients require the less restrictive assumption of essential tau-equivalence. Even small reliability differences produced by the Spearman-Brown and alpha coefficient formulas on the same data can result in large applied differences.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, M. J. , & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
2.
Alsawalmeh, Y. M. , & Feldt, L. S. (1994). Testing the equality of two related intraclass reliability coefficients. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 183-190.
3.
Alsawalmeh, Y. M. , & Feldt, L. S. (1999). Testing the equality of independent alpha coefficients adjusted for test length. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 373-383.
4.
Alsawalmeh, Y. M. , & Feldt, L. S. (in press). A test of the equality of two related alpha coefficients adjusted via the Spearman-Brown formula. Applied Psychological Measurement.
5.
Brown, W. (1910). Some experimental results in the correlation of mental abilities. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 296-322.
6.
Charter, R. A. (1996). Note on the underrepresentation of the split-half reliability formula for unequal standard deviations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82, 401-402.
7.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98-104.
8.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
9.
Feldt, L. S. , & Ankenmann, R. D. (1998). Appropriate sample size for comparing alpha reliabilities. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 170-178.
10.
Feldt, L. S. , & Ankenmann, R. D. (1999). Determining sample size for a test of the equality of alpha coefficients when the number of part-tests is small. Psychological Methods, 4, 366-377.
11.
Feldt, L. S. , & Brennan, R. L. (1989). Reliability. In R. H. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
12.
Feldt, L. S. , & Qualls, A. L. (1996). Bias in coefficient alpha arising from heterogeneity of test content. Applied Measurement in Education, 9, 277-286.
13.
Hopkins, K. D. , Stanley, J. C., & Hopkins, B. R. (1990). Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation (7th ed.). Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14.
Lord, F. M. , & Novik, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15.
Nunnally, J. C. , & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGrawHill.
16.
Rulon, P. J. (1939). A simplified procedure for determining the reliability of a test by splithalves. Harvard Educational Review, 9, 99-103.
17.
Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement of association between two things. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 72-101.
18.
Spearman, C. (1910). Correlation calculated with faulty data. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 271-295.
19.
Thompson, B. (1994). Guidelines for authors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 837-847.
20.
Thompson, B. , & Vacha-Hasse, T. (2000). Psychometric is datametrics: The test is not reliable. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 174-195.
21.
Wilkinson, L. , & APA Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604. [reprint available through the APA Home Page: http://www.apa.org/journals/amp/amp548594.html]
22.
Zar, J. H. (1984). Biostatistical analysis (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23.
Zimmerman, D. W. , Zumbo, B. D., & Lalonde, C. (1993). Coefficient alpha as an estimate of test reliability under violation of two assumptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 33-49.
