2015
DOI: 10.1016/s2212-5671(15)00123-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How Reliable are Measurement Scales? External Factors with Indirect Influence on Reliability Estimators

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

16
515
5
23

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 855 publications
(578 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
16
515
5
23
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the construct "transition adjustment" should be interpreted with caution, because of its slightly low internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha 0.583). Although the alpha was close to the acceptable level of 0.6-0.7 [57], the inter-relatedness of the items in this construct should be examined further. For instance, the item of "drop in GPAs" might not be applied to DEs who were straight from secondary school, because they did not have GPAs in their secondary schools with which to compare.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…Furthermore, the construct "transition adjustment" should be interpreted with caution, because of its slightly low internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha 0.583). Although the alpha was close to the acceptable level of 0.6-0.7 [57], the inter-relatedness of the items in this construct should be examined further. For instance, the item of "drop in GPAs" might not be applied to DEs who were straight from secondary school, because they did not have GPAs in their secondary schools with which to compare.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…Reliability analysis using Cronbach's alpha was used to assess the internal consistency of the revised scales. A Cronbach's alpha coefficient value (α) of greater than 0.6 indicates an acceptable level of reliability [58,59]. As shown in Table 4, the α values ranged from 0.653 to 0.897.…”
Section: Efa and Reliability Testmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Convergent validity at scale level was assessed using four variables drawn from the Schieman and Young (2013) [1] study. These variables were selected on the basis of their face validity [29] i.e., when the content of the research is related to the studied variables in terms of logic. The selected variables comprised: extent of ‘ industrial (work) experience’ , ‘ feeling angry, and frustrated, at work in the last month ’ (‘none of the time’; ‘a little of the time’; ‘some of the time’; ‘most of the time’; and ‘all of the time’); ‘ thinking about work-related issues when not working ’ (‘never’; ‘rarely’; ‘sometimes’; ‘often’; ‘very often’); and ‘ I have the support from co-workers that helps me to manage my work and personal or family life ’ (‘strongly disagree’; ‘somewhat disagree’; ‘somewhat agree’; ‘strongly agree’; and ‘not applicable’).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%