A reliability generalization meta-analysis was carried out to estimate the average reliability of the seven-item, 5-point Likert-type Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), one of the most widespread scales developed around the COVID-19 pandemic. Different reliability coefficients from classical test theory and the Rasch Measurement Model were meta-analyzed, heterogeneity among the most reported reliability estimates was examined by searching for moderators, and a predictive model to estimate the expected reliability was proposed. At least one reliability estimate was available for a total of 44 independent samples out of 42 studies, being that Cronbach’s alpha was most frequently reported. The coefficients exhibited pooled estimates ranging from .85 to .90. The moderator analyses led to a predictive model in which the standard deviation of scores explained 36.7% of the total variability among alpha coefficients. The FCV-19S has been shown to be consistently reliable regardless of the moderator variables examined.
AhorsuD. K.LinC. Y.ImaniV.SaffariM.GriffithsM. D.PakpourA. H. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 scale: Development and initial validation. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8
2.
AppelbaumM.CooperH.KlineR. B.Mayo-WilsonE.NezuA. M.RaoS. M. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA publications and communications board task force report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000389
3.
BarriosI.Ríos-GonzálezC.O’HigginsM.GonzálezI.GarcíaO.Ruiz-DíazN.Castaldelli-MaiaJ. M.VentriglioA.ToralesJ. (2020). Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S). Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-33345/v1
4.
Blázquez-RincónD.DuránJ. I.BotellaJ. (2020, September15). The Fear of COVID-19 Scale: A reliability generalization meta-analysis. Mendeley Data. http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/dtwdf566xm.1
5.
BoedekerP.HensonR. K. (2020). Evaluation of heterogeneity and heterogeneity interval estimators in random-effects meta-analysis of the standardized mean difference in education and psychology. Psychological Methods, 25(3), 346-364. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000241
6.
BonettD. G. (2002). Sample size requirements for testing and estimating coefficient alpha. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27(4), 335-340. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986027004335
7.
BotellaJ.SueroM.GambaraH. (2010). Psychometric inferences from a meta-analysis of reliability and internal consistency coefficients. Psychological Methods, 15(4), 386-397. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019626
8.
Center for Systems Science and Engineering. (2020). COVID-19 data repository by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University. https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19
9.
CicchettiD. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessments instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284-290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284
DimitrovD. M. (2002). Reliability: Arguments for multiple perspectives and potential problems with generalization across studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(5), 783-801. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316402236878
12.
DongE.DuH.GardnerL. (2020). An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. Lancet Infectious Diseases, 20(5), 533-534. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30120-1
HensonR. K.ThompsonB. (2002). Characterizing measurement error in scores across studies: Some recommendations for conducting “reliability generalization” studies. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 35(2), 113-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2002.12069054
16.
HigginsJ. P. T.ThompsonS. G.DeeksJ. J.AltmanD. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327(7414), 557-560. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
Huarcaya-VictoriaJ.Villarreal-ZegarraD.PodestàA.Luna-CuadrosM. A. (2020). Psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale in general population of Lima, Peru. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00354-5
19.
KnappG.HartungJ. (2003). Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate. Statistics in Medicine, 22(17), 2693-2710. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1482
20.
López-IbáñezC.López-NicolásR.Blázquez-RincónD.Sánchez-MecaJ. (2020). Reliability generalization meta-analysis: A comparison of statistical analytic strategies [Conference talk]. https://www.psycharchives.org/handle/20.500.12034/2100
21.
López-LópezJ. A.Marín-MartínezF.Sánchez-MecaJ.Van den NoortgateW.ViechtbauerW. (2014). Estimation of the predictive power of the model in mixed-effects meta-regression: A simulation study. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67(1), 30-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12002
22.
MasuyamaA.ShinkawaH.KuboT. (2020). Validation and psychometric properties of the Japanese version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale among adolescents. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. Advance online publication, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00368-z
23.
MuñizJ. (1992). Teoria clásica de los tests (1st ed.). Pirámide.
24.
NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill.
25.
ReznikA.GritsenkoV.KonstantinovV.KhamenkaN.IsralowitzR. (2020). COVID-19 fear in Eastern Europe: Validation of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00283-3
26.
Sánchez-MecaJ.López-LópezJ. A.López-PinaJ. A. (2013). Some recommended statistical analytic practices when reliability generalization studies are conducted. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 66(3), 402-425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.2012.02057.x
27.
SawilowskyS. S. (2000). Psychometrics versus datametrics: Comment on Vacha-Haase’s “reliability generalization” method and some EPM editorial policies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(2), 157-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131640021970439
28.
SugawaraD.MasuyamaA.KuboT. (2020). Socioeconomic impacts of the COVID-19 lockdown on the mental health and life satisfaction of the Japanese population. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/sndpm
29.
Trizano-HermosillaI.AlvaradoJ. M. (2016). Best alternatives to Cronbach’s alpha reliability in realistic conditions: Congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 769. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769
30.
Vacha-HaaseT. (1998). Reliability generalization: Exploring variance in measurement error affecting score reliability across studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58(1), 6-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058001002
31.
ViechtbauerW. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), Article 106272. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
