Reliability Generalization: The Importance of Considering Sample Specificity, Confident Intervals, and Subgroup Differences.

49 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Students’ Perceptions of Characteristics of Effective College Teachers: A Validity Study of a Teaching Evaluation Form Using a Mixed-Methods Analysis (2007, background): “…yields scores with adequate reliability coefficients, it does not imply that these scores will yield valid scores because evidence of score reliability, although essential, is not sufficient for establishing evidence of score validity (Crocker & Algina, 1986; Onwuegbuzie & Daniel, 2002, 2004).”
Measurement Error of Scores on the Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale across Studies (2001, background): “(p. 3) Accordingly, poor reliability can reduce statistical power (Onwuegbuzie & Daniel, 2000) and potentially lead to inappropriate conclusions concerning substantive research findings (Thompson, 1994).”
The Measurement and Predictive Ability of Metacognition in Middle School Learners (2012, methodology): “Using procedures recommended Onwuegbuzie and Daniel (2000, 2002) the upper confidence interval was calculated for each of these coefficients.”
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Score Reliability Across: Studies a Meta-Analytic Reliability Generalization Study (2002, background): “…2-3) Because all classical statistical analyses are correlational in the general linear model (Henson, 2000; Thompson, 1991, 1994a), poor reliability can reduce statistical power (Onwuegbuzie & Daniel, 2000) and potentially lead to inappropriate conclusions concerning substantive research findings.”