Reliability of Scales With General Structure: Point and Interval Estimation Using a Structural Equation Modeling Approach

By Tenko Raykov, P. Shrout. 2002

284 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1e8665faf69df47dc594943603295c49c1dee193

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Reliability of Summed Item Scores Using Structural Equation Modeling: An Alternative to Coefficient Alpha (2009, methodology): “Methods for computing SEM estimates have been presented by multiple researchers (e.g., Bollen, 1989; Green & Hershberger, 2000; Joreskog, 1971; McDonald, 1999; Miller, 1995; Raykov & Shrout, 2002 ).”
Analyzing the Reliability of Multidimensional Measures: An Example from Intelligence Research (2005, methodology): “…reliability estimates that take the multidimensional structure of the scale indicators into account should be regarded as substant ive only when the assumed multidimensionality of the scale indicators can be theoretically justified or be replicated in independent studies (Raykov & Shrout, 2002).”
Dimensionality of the Revised Life Orientation Test and the status of filler items (2003, methodology): “The 90% confidence intervals for omega were obtained using bootstrapping (1000 times, as suggested by Raykov & Shrout, 2002).”
Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and Mcdonald’s ωH: their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability (2005, methodology): “Bootstrapping and analytic techniques for interval estimation of have been described by Raykov (1998a,b, 2002) and Raykov and Shrout (2002) and we suspect these methods should also be useful for obtaining a standard error and confidence interval when estimating h.”
Fear of Death and Supernatural Beliefs: Developing A New Supernatural Belief Scale to Test the Relationship (2013, background): “Instead, SEMbased estimates can indicate how well a latent variable is measured by its indicators (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Raykov & Shrout, 2002).”
Estimation of Generalizability Coefficients Via a Structural Equation Modeling Approach to Scale Reliability Evaluation (2006, methodology): “To this end, the article integrated the underlying ideas of the general structure scale reliability estimation method in Raykov and Shrout (2002) and in Marcoulides (1996, 2000b) for estimating variance components related to the object of measurement.”
Measurement Error Models With Uncertainty About the Error Variance (2013, methodology): “The standard errors of these quantities were obtained by bootstrapping (Raykov, 2009).”
The Influence of the Teaching and Learning Environment on the Development of Generic Capabilities Needed for a Knowledge-Based Society (2005, unknown): “DAVID KEMBER AND DORIS Y. P. LEUNG (e.g. Raykov & Shrout, 2002 ).”
On Multilevel Model Reliability Estimation From the Perspective of Structural Equation Modeling (2006, background): “…evaluation, starting at the latest with an informative treatment by Bollen (1989), have been developed primarily for the congeneric test model, with extensions to other than unidimensional or weighted composites being straightforward (McDonald, 1999; Raykov, 2001, 2004a; Raykov & Shrout, 2002).”
Estimating Generalizability to a Latent Variable Common to All of a Scale's Indicators: A Comparison of Estimators for ωh (2006, methodology): “Bootstrapping and analytic techniques similar to thos‘e described by Raykov (1998b) and Raykov and Shrout (2002) should also be useful for obtaining a standard error and confidence interval when estimating ωh.”
Scale Reliability Evaluation Under Multiple Assumption Violations (2016, methodology): “For this scale, after some straightforward algebra to work out the true variance of the sum score Z2 (e.g., Raykov & Shrout, 2002), the reliability estimate for the relevant version of the general structure scale in Equation 7 becomes ρ̂Z2 = B̂ B̂ + Ĉ , (8) where the estimates of the construct…”
Student Perceptions of Teacher Support and Competencies for Fostering Youth Purpose and Positive Youth Development: Perspectives From Two Countries (2014, methodology): “Additionally, we report the composite reliability (CR) (Bacon, Sauer, & Young, 1995) as is most appropriate as an indicator of reliability in measures of latent constructs in the structural equation modeling (SEM) framework (Raykov & Shrout, 2002).”
The α and the ω of Congeneric Test Theory: An Extension of Reliability and Internal Consistency to Heterogeneous Tests (2005, methodology): “The MLE of ω can be constructed from equation (5) using the MLEs of Λ, Ψ, and Θ, which, in turn, can be obtained from software for structural equation modeling (Raykov, 1997a, 1998b, 2002; Raykov & Shrout, 2002).”
A Note on Structural Equation Modeling Estimates of Reliability (2010, methodology): “As an alternative to coefficient alpha, researchers have proposed structural equation modeling (SEM) methods to estimate reliability (e.g., Bentler, 2009; Bollen, 1989; Jöreskog, 1971; Komaroff, 1997; Miller, 1995; Raykov, 1997a, 1998, 2000; Raykov & Shrout, 2002).”