Psychometrika

, Volume 70, Issue 1, pp 123–133

Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and Mcdonald’s ωH: their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability

  • Richard E. Zinbarg
  • William Revelle
  • Iftah Yovel
  • Wen Li
Article

Abstract

We make theoretical comparisons among five coefficients—Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, McDonald’s ωh, and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Though many end users and psychometricians alike may not distinguish among these five coefficients, we demonstrate formally their nonequivalence. Specifically, whereas there are conditions under which α, β, and ωh are equivalent to each other and to one of the two conceptualizations of reliability considered here, we show that equality with this conceptualization of reliability and between α and ωh holds only under a highly restrictive set of conditions and that the conditions under which β equals ωh are only somewhat more general. The nonequivalence of α, β, and ωh suggests that important information about the psychometric properties of a scale may be missing when scale developers and users only report α as is almost always the case

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blalock H. M. (1970) Estimating measurement error using multiple indicators and several points in time. American Sociological Review, 35:101–111Google Scholar
  2. Bollen K. (1989) Structural Equations With Latent Variables. New York: Wiley SonsGoogle Scholar
  3. Bollen K., Lennox R. (1991) Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110:305–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cronbach L. J. (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16:297–334Google Scholar
  5. Green S. B., Hershberger S. L. (2000) Correlated errors in true score models and their effect on coefficient alpha. Structural Equation Modeling, 7:251–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Green S. B., Lissitz R. W., Mulaik S. A. (1977) Limitations of coefficient alpha as an index of test unidimensionality. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37:827–838Google Scholar
  7. Heise D. R. (1969) Separating reliability and stability in test-retest correlation. American Sociological Review, 34:93–101Google Scholar
  8. Joreskog K. G. (1974) Analyzing psychological data by structural analysis of covariance matrices. In R. C. Atkinson, D. H. Krantz, R. D. Luce, P. Suppes (Eds), Contemporary Developments in Mathematical Psychology (pp. 1–56) San Francisco: FreemanGoogle Scholar
  9. Komaroff E. (1997) Effect of simultaneous violations of essential tau—equvalence and uncorrelated error on coefficient alpha. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21:337–348Google Scholar
  10. Lord F. M. (1955) Sampling fluctuations resulting from the sampling of test items. Psychometrika, 20:1–22Google Scholar
  11. Lord F. M., Novick M. R. (1968) Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores (with contributions by A. Birnbaum) Reading, MA: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
  12. McDonald R. P. (1970) The theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis, canonical factor analysis and alpha factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 23:1–21Google Scholar
  13. McDonald R. P. (1978) Generalizability in factorable domains: “Domain validity and generalizability.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38:75–79Google Scholar
  14. McDonald R. P. (1985) Factor Analysis and Related Methods. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
  15. McDonald R. P. (1999) Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
  16. Novick, M. R., Lewis C. (1967) Coefficient alpha and the reliability of composite measurements. Psychometrika, 32:1–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Raykov T. (1997) Scale reliability, Cronbach’s coefficient alpha, and violations of essential tau-equivalence with fixed congeneric components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32:329–353Google Scholar
  18. Raykov T. (1998a) Coefficient alpha and composite reliability with interrelated nonhomogeneous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22:375–385Google Scholar
  19. Raykov T. (1998b) A method for obtaining standard errors and confidence intervals of composite reliability for congeneric items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22:369–374Google Scholar
  20. Raykov T. (2001a) Bias of coefficient alpha for fixed congeneric measures with correlated errors. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25:69–76MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. Raykov T. (2001b) Estimation of congeneric scale reliability using covariance structure analysis with nonlinear constraints. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 54:315–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Raykov T. (2002) Analytic estimation of standard error and confidence interval for scale reliability. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 37:89–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Raykov T., Shrout P. E. (2002) Reliability of scales with general structure: Point and interval estimation using a structured equation modeling approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 9:195–212CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. Revelle W. (1979) Hierarchical cluster analysis and the internal structure of tests. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14:57–74Google Scholar
  25. Schmid J., Leiman J. M. (1957) The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika, 22:53–62Google Scholar
  26. Wiley D. E., Wiley J. A. (1970) The estimation of measurement error in panel data. American Sociological Review, 35:112–117Google Scholar
  27. Tucker L. (1940) The role of correlated factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 5:141–152Google Scholar
  28. Wherry R. J. (1959) Hierarchical factor solutions without rotation. Psychometrika, 24:45–51Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychometric Society 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard E. Zinbarg
    • 1
    • 5
  • William Revelle
    • 2
  • Iftah Yovel
    • 3
  • Wen Li
    • 4
  1. 1.Northwestern University, the Family Institute at Northwestern UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Northwestern UniversityUSA
  3. 3.Northwestern UniversityUSA
  4. 4.Northwestern UniversityUSA
  5. 5.Northwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations