Numerical Differences Between Guttman’s Reliability Coefficients and the GLB

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Quantitative Psychology Research

Abstract

For samples smaller than 1000 and tests longer than ten items, the greatest lower bound (GLB) to the reliability is known to be biased and not recommended as a method to estimate test-score reliability. As a first step in finding alternative lower bounds under these conditions, we investigated the population values of seven reliability coefficients: Coefficients \(\lambda _{1}\), \(\lambda _{2}\), \(\lambda _{3}\) (a.k.a Cronbach’s alpha), \(\lambda _{4}\), \(\lambda _{5}\), \(\lambda _{6}\) and the GLB under varying correlational structures, and varying levels of number of items and item variances. Coefficients \(\lambda _{2}\), \(\lambda _{4}\) and \(\lambda _{6}\) had population values closest to the GLB and may be considered as alternatives for the GLB in small samples. A necessary second step, investigating the behavior of these coefficients in samples, is a topic for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (France)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 96.29
Price includes VAT (France)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
EUR 126.59
Price includes VAT (France)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
EUR 126.59
Price includes VAT (France)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bentler, P. M., & Woodward, J. A. (1980). Inequalities among lower bounds to reliability: With applications to test construction and factor analysis. Psychometrika, 45, 249–267.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Benton, T. (2015). An empirical assessment of Guttman’s lambda 4 reliability coefficient. In R. E. Millsap, D. M. Bolt, L. A. van der Ark, & W. -C. Wang (Eds.), Quantitative psychology research: The 78th annual meeting of the Psychometric Society (pp. 301–310). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? an examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391–418.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, L. (1945). A basis for analyzing test-retest reliability. Psychometrika, 10, 255–282.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, P. H., & Agunwamba, C. C. (1977). Lower bounds for the reliability of the total score on a test composed of non-homogeneous items: I: Algebraic lower bounds. Psychometrika, 42, 567–578.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 139–153). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Revelle, W. (2015). Psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research Version 1.5.8 [computer software]. Evanston, IL. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8, 350–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74, 107–120.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ten Berge, J. M. F., Snijders, T. A. B., & Zegers, F. E. (1981). Computational aspects of the greatest lower bound to the reliability and constrained minimum trace factor analysis. Psychometrika, 46, 201–213.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ten Berge, J. M. F., & Sočan, G. (2004). The greatest lower bound to the reliability of a test and the hypothesis of unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 69, 613–625.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Verhelst, N. (2000). Estimating the reliability of test from single test administration. Unpublished report. Arnhem, The Netherlands: Cito. Retrieved from http://www.cito.com/research_and_development/psychometrics/~/media/cito_com/research_and_development/publications/cito_report98_2.ashx.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodhouse, B., & Jackson, P. H. (1977). Lower bounds for the reliability of a test composed of nonhomogeneous items II: A search procedure to locate the greatest lower bound. Psychometrika, 67, 251–259.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zinbarg, R., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005). Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and McDonald’s ω w : Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 122–133.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pieter R. Oosterwijk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Oosterwijk, P.R., van der Ark, L.A., Sijtsma, K. (2016). Numerical Differences Between Guttman’s Reliability Coefficients and the GLB. In: van der Ark, L., Bolt, D., Wang, WC., Douglas, J., Wiberg, M. (eds) Quantitative Psychology Research. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, vol 167. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38759-8_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Navigation