Beyond internal consistency reliability: Rationale and user’s guide for Multitrait Analysis Program on the microcomputer

  • Ron D. Hays
  • Toshi Hayashi
Session VII Coding And Analysis Of Data


A methodology for evaluating Likert-type scales is presented. Multitrait scaling is a straightforward approach to scale analysis that focuses on items as the unit of analysis and utilizes the logic of convergent and discriminant validity. Multitrait scaling is illustrated with the Multitrait Analysis Program, using patient satisfaction data from the Medical Outcomes Study.


  1. Alwin, D. (1974). An analytic comparison of four approaches to the interpretation of relationships in the multitrait-multimethod matrix In H. L. Costner (Ed.),Sociological methodology, 1973–1974 (pp. 79–105). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Boruch, R. F., &Wolins, L. (1970). A procedure for estimation o trait, method, and error variance attributable to a measure.Educa tional & Psychological Measurement,30, 547–574.Google Scholar
  3. Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology.Journal of Consulting & Clinicc Psychology,56, 754–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structur of tests.Psychometrika,16, 297–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cronbach, L. J., &Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psycho logical tests.Psychological Bulletin,52, 281–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Donald, C. A., &Ware, J. E. (1982).The quantification of socio contacts and resources (Rep. No. R-2937-HHS). Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  7. Eisen, M. B., Donald, C. A., Ware, J. E., &Brook, R. H. (1980)Conceptualization and measurement of health for children in the Healt Insurance Study (Rep. No. R-2313-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  8. Guilford, J. P. (1954).Psychometric methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  9. Hayashi, T., &Hays, R. D. (1987). A microcomputer program for analyzing multitrait-multimethod matrices.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,19, 345–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hays, R. D., &DiMatteo, M. R. (1987). A short-form measure of loneliness.Journal of Personality Assessment,51, 69–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Howard, K. I., &Forehand, G. G. (1962). A method for correcting item-total correlations for the effect of relevant item inclusion.Educational & Psychological Measurement,22, 731–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hubert, L. J., &Baker, F. B. (1979). A note on analyzing the multitrait-multimethod matrix: An application of a generalized proximity function comparison.British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology,32, 179–184.Google Scholar
  13. Jackson, D. N. (1969). Multimethod factor analysis in the evaluation of convergent and discriminant validity.Psychological Bulletin,72, 30–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jackson, D. N. (1970). A sequential system for personality scale development. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed),Current topics in clinical and community psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 61–96) New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  15. Jessor, R., Graves, T. D., Hanson, R. C., &Jessor, S. L. (1968).Society, personality, and deviant behavior: A study of a tri-ethnic community. New York: Krieger.Google Scholar
  16. Levin, J., Montag, I., &Comrey, A. L. (1983) Comparison of multitrait-multimethod, factor, and smallest space analysis on personality scale data.Psychological Reports,53, 591–596.Google Scholar
  17. McCusker, J. (1984). Development of scales to measure satisfaction preferences regarding long-term and terminal care.Medical Care,22, 476–493.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Schmitt, N., &Stults, D. M. (1986). Methodology review: Analysis of multitrait-multimethod matrices.Applied Psychological Measurement,10, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schriescheim, C. A. (1981). Leniency effects on convergent and discriminant validity for grouped questionnaire items: A further investigation.Educational & Psychological Measurement,41, 401–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stanley, J. C. (1961). Analysis of unreplicated three-way classifications, with applications to rater bias and trail independence.Psychometrika,26, 205–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix.Psychological Bulletin,87, 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stewart, A. L., Hays, R. D., &Ware, J. E. (1988). The MOS Short-form General Health Survey: Reliability and validity in a patient population.Medical Care,26, 724–735.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Ware, J. E. (1984). Methodological considerations in the selection of health status assessment procedures. In N. K. Wenger, M. E. Mattson, C. D. Furberg, & J. Elinson (Eds.),Assessment of quality of life in clinical trials of cardiovascular therapies. New York: LeJacq.Google Scholar
  24. Ware, J. E., Snyder, M. R., Wright, R., &Davies, A. R. (1983). Defining and measuring patient satisfaction with medical care.Evaluation & Program Planning,6, 247–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Widaman, K. F. (1985). Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitrait-multimethod data.Applied Psychological Measurement,9, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ron D. Hays
    • 1
  • Toshi Hayashi
    • 2
  1. 1.RAND CorporationSanta Monica
  2. 2.Office of ResearchCalifornia State AssemblySacramento

Personalised recommendations