Abstract

Reliability is usually estimated for a test score, but it can also be estimated for item scores. Item-score reliability can be useful to assess the item’s contribution to the test score’s reliability, for identifying unreliable scores in aberrant item-score patterns in person-fit analysis, and for selecting the most reliable item from a test to use as a single-item measure. Four methods were discussed for estimating item-score reliability: the Molenaar–Sijtsma method (method MS), Guttman’s method , the latent class reliability coefficient (method LCRC), and the correction for attenuation (method CA). A simulation study was used to compare the methods with respect to median bias, variability (interquartile range [IQR]), and percentage of outliers. The simulation study consisted of six conditions: standard, polytomous items, unequal parameters, two-dimensional data, long test, and small sample size. Methods MS and CA were the most accurate. Method LCRC showed almost unbiased results, but large variability. Method consistently underestimated item-score reliabilty, but showed a smaller IQR than the other methods.

Highlights

  • Reliability of measurement is often considered for test scores, but some authors have argued that it may be useful to consider the reliability of individual items (Ginns & Barrie, 2004; Meijer & Sijtsma, 1995; Meijer, Sijtsma, & Molenaar, 1995; Wanous & Reichers, 1996; Wanous, Reichers, & Hudy, 1997)

  • Just as test-score reliability expresses the repeatability of test scores in a group of people keeping administration conditions equal (Lord & Novick, 1968, p. 65), item-score reliability expresses the repeatability of an item score

  • Item-score reliability is used in health research for measuring, for example, quality of life (Stewart, Hays, & Ware, 1988; Yohannes, Willgoss, Dodd, Fatoye, & Webb, 2010) and psychosocial stress (Littman, White, Satia, Bowen, & Kristal, 2006), and one-item measures have been assessed in marketing research for measuring ad and brand attitude (Bergkvist & Rossiter, 2007)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Reliability of measurement is often considered for test scores, but some authors have argued that it may be useful to consider the reliability of individual items (Ginns & Barrie, 2004; Meijer & Sijtsma, 1995; Meijer, Sijtsma, & Molenaar, 1995; Wanous & Reichers, 1996; Wanous, Reichers, & Hudy, 1997). 65), item-score reliability expresses the repeatability of an item score. Item-score reliability may be useful in person-fit analysis to identify item scores that contain too little reliable information to explain. Meijer, Molenaar, and Sijtsma (1994) showed that fewer items are needed for identifying misfit when item-score reliability is higher. If items are meant to be used as single-item measurement instruments, their suitability for the job envisaged requires high item-score reliability. Item-score reliability is used in health research for measuring, for example, quality of life (Stewart, Hays, & Ware, 1988; Yohannes, Willgoss, Dodd, Fatoye, & Webb, 2010) and psychosocial stress (Littman, White, Satia, Bowen, & Kristal, 2006), and one-item measures have been assessed in marketing research for measuring ad and brand attitude (Bergkvist & Rossiter, 2007)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call