Sample Compositions and Variabilities in Published Studies versus Those in Test Manuals: Validity of Score Reliability Inductions

By T. Vacha-haase, Lori Kogan, B. Thompson. 2000

212 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/923e2965c8aea056d4097d2c8e30bdd98ed57c38

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

Citations in the corpus

Cronbach's Alpha: Review of Limitations and Associated Recommendations (2010, background): “Vacha-Haase, Kogan, and Thompson (2000) referred to this phenomenon as “reliability induction” (p.563).”
Characterizing Measurement Error in Scores Across Studies: Some Recommendations for Conducting “Reliability Generalization” Studies (2002, background): “Unfortunately, few researchers make explicit comparisons of sample compositions and variabilities when inducting reliability estimates, and empirical studies show that such inductions are all too frequently wildly inappropriate (Vacha-Haase et al., 2000; Whittington, 1998).”
Treating Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Coefficients as Data in Counseling Research (2006, background): “Consequently, Vacha-Haase et al. (2000) recommend that researchers report basic descriptive information about their samples so that other researchers or test users can determine whether there is even a minimal rationale for assuming that prior reported reliability coefficients are relevant for the…”
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Score Reliability Across: Studies a Meta-Analytic Reliability Generalization Study (2002, methodology): “The use of prior coefficients as relevant and applicable to the data in hand has been called reliability induction by Vacha-Haase et al. (2000).”
A note on the score reliability for the Satisfaction With Life Scale: an RG study (2007, background): “This improper citing practice has been coined reliability induction (Vacha-Haase et al. 2000).”
Measurement Error of Scores on the Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale across Studies (2001, background): “This practice, called “reliability induction” by Vacha-Haase, Kogan, and Thompson (2000) due to researchers’ attempts to induct a specific reliability estimate to a broader context of studies, may be legitimate only if the inducted sample is similar to the sample under investigation in terms of…”
A meta-analytic reliability generalization study of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (2011, background): “This process of reliability induction would be adequate assuming that the target sample of the study was con rmed as similar in composition and variability to that of the reference sample; but this check is not usually carried out (Vacha-Haase et al. 2000).”