Abstract
A method is presented for estimating reliability using structural equation modeling (SEM) that allows for nonlinearity between factors and item scores. Assuming the focus is on consistency of summed item scores, this method for estimating reliability is preferred to those based on linear SEM models and to the most commonly reported estimate of reliability, coefficient alpha.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bentler, P.M. (2009). Alpha, dimension-free, and model-based internal consistency reliability. Psychometrika, 74, doi:10.1007/s11336-008-9100-1.
Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
Curran, P.J., West, S.G., & Finch, J.F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16–29.
DiStefano, C. (2002). The impact of categorization with confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 327–346.
Feldt, L.S., & Brennan, R.L. (1989). Reliability. In R.L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement. (3rd ed.). (pp. 105–146). New York: Macmillan.
Finney, S., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G.R. Hancock & R.O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 269–314). Greenwich: Information Age.
Flora, D.B., & Curran, P.J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466–491.
Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Green, S.B. (1983). Identifiability of spurious factors using linear factor analysis with binary items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 139–147.
Green, S.B., Akey, T.M., Fleming, K.K., Hershberger, S.L., & Marquis, J.G. (1997). Effect of the number of scale points on chi-square fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 4, 108–120.
Green, S.B., & Hershberger, S.L. (2000). Correlated errors in true score models and their effect on coefficient alpha. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 251–270.
Green, S.B., & Yang, Y. (2009). Commentary on coefficient alpha: a cautionary tale. Psychometrika, 74, doi:10.1007/s11336-008-9098-4.
Jöreskog, K.G. (1971). Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric test. Psychometrika, 36, 109–133.
Lissitz, R.W., & Green, S.B. (1975). Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: A Monte Carlo approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 10–13.
Lozano, L.M., García-Cueto, E., & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 4, 73–479.
Maydeu-Olivares, A., Coffman, D.L., & Hartmann, W.M. (2007). Asymptotically distribution-free (ADF) interval estimation of coefficient alpha. Psychological Methods, 12(2), 157–176.
McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test theory: A unified approach. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
McDonald, R.P., & Ahlawat, K.S. (1974). Difficulty factors in binary data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 27, 82–99.
Miller, M.B. (1995). Coefficient Alpha: A basic introduction from the perspectives of classical test theory and structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 2, 255–273.
Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (2008). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Authors.
Raykov, T., & Shrout, P. (2002). Reliability of scales with general structure: Point and interval estimation using a structural equation modeling approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 195–212.
Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika (to be published in the March).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Green, S.B., Yang, Y. Reliability of Summed Item Scores Using Structural Equation Modeling: An Alternative to Coefficient Alpha. Psychometrika 74, 155–167 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9099-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9099-3