Further discussion on reliability: The art of reliability estimation

Yanyun Yang, Samuel B. Green

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations


Sijtsma and van der Ark (2015) focused in their lead article on three frameworks for reliability estimation in nursing research: classical test theory (CTT), factor analysis (FA), and generalizability theory. We extend their presentation with particular attention to CTT and FA methods. We first consider the potential of yielding an overly negative or an overly positive assessment of reliability based on coefficient alpha. Next, we discuss other CTT methods for estimating reliability and how the choice of methods affects the interpretation of the reliability coefficient. Finally, we describe FA methods, which not only permit an understanding of a measure's underlying structure but also yield a variety of reliability coefficients with different interpretations. On a more general note, we discourage reporting reliability as a two-choice outcome - unsatisfactory or satisfactory; rather, we recommend that nursing researchers make a conceptual and empirical argument about when a measure might be more or less reliable, depending on its use.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)146-151
Number of pages6
JournalNursing research
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 25 2015


  • classical test theory
  • coefficient alpha
  • factor analysis
  • reliability
  • structural equation modeling
  • transient error

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'Further discussion on reliability: The art of reliability estimation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this