Sample size requirements for the design of reliability study: review and new results

By M. Shoukri, M. H. Asyali, Allan Donner. 2004

458 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6e6f1fa9c0cd39969dcb974a0172fb1abe09b211

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

1. Christian U. Krägeloh

In Statistics and Probability

1. Christian U. Krägeloh

Citations in the corpus

• Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. (2011, unknown): “80 are often used as the minimum standards for reliability coefficients, but this may be only sufficient for group-level comparisons or research purposes [12,58,108].”
• Measuring Mindfulness: Applying Generalizability Theory to Distinguish between State and Trait (2017, methodology): “The sample size (n = 55) satisfied criteria for a reliability study in medical research (Shoukri et al. 2004) and is adequate for generalizability analysis because G-coefficients are essentially similar to reliability coefficients (Bloch and Norman 2012).”