理解 Alpha 和 Beta 以及共同方差的来源:理论依据和实例。

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of personality assessment Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.1080/00223891.2024.2420175
Steven P Reise, Mark G Haviland
{"title":"理解 Alpha 和 Beta 以及共同方差的来源:理论依据和实例。","authors":"Steven P Reise, Mark G Haviland","doi":"10.1080/00223891.2024.2420175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Coefficient alpha estimates the degree to which scale scores reflect systematic variation due to one or more common dimensions. Coefficient beta, on the other hand, estimates the degree to which scale scores reflect a single dimension common among all the items; that is, the target construct a scale attempts to measure. As such, the magnitude of beta, relative to alpha, informs on the ability to meaningfully interpret derived scale scores as reflecting a single construct. Despite its clear interpretative usefulness, coefficient beta is rarely reported and, perhaps, not well understood. As such, we first describe how coefficient alpha and beta are analogues to model-based reliability coefficients omega total and omega hierarchical. We then demonstrate with simulated data how these indices function under a variety of data structures. Finally, we perform a hierarchical cluster analysis of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire's Stress Reaction Scale, estimating alpha and beta, as clusters form. This demonstrates a chief advantage of alpha and beta; they do not require a formal structural model. Moreover, we illustrate how scales that primarily are based on sets of homogeneous item clusters can \"ramp up\" to yield reliable scores with conceptual breadth and predominantly reflect the intended target construct.</p>","PeriodicalId":16707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding Alpha and Beta and Sources of Common Variance: Theoretical Underpinnings and a Practical Example.\",\"authors\":\"Steven P Reise, Mark G Haviland\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00223891.2024.2420175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Coefficient alpha estimates the degree to which scale scores reflect systematic variation due to one or more common dimensions. Coefficient beta, on the other hand, estimates the degree to which scale scores reflect a single dimension common among all the items; that is, the target construct a scale attempts to measure. As such, the magnitude of beta, relative to alpha, informs on the ability to meaningfully interpret derived scale scores as reflecting a single construct. Despite its clear interpretative usefulness, coefficient beta is rarely reported and, perhaps, not well understood. As such, we first describe how coefficient alpha and beta are analogues to model-based reliability coefficients omega total and omega hierarchical. We then demonstrate with simulated data how these indices function under a variety of data structures. Finally, we perform a hierarchical cluster analysis of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire's Stress Reaction Scale, estimating alpha and beta, as clusters form. This demonstrates a chief advantage of alpha and beta; they do not require a formal structural model. Moreover, we illustrate how scales that primarily are based on sets of homogeneous item clusters can \\\"ramp up\\\" to yield reliable scores with conceptual breadth and predominantly reflect the intended target construct.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2024.2420175\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2024.2420175","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

系数α估计的是量表分数反映一个或多个共同维度引起的系统性变化的程度。而贝塔系数则估计了量表分数反映所有项目共同的单一维度的程度,也就是量表试图测量的目标结构。因此,相对于 alpha 而言,beta 系数的大小有助于将量表得分有意义地解释为反映单一建构的能力。尽管贝塔系数具有明显的解释作用,但它却很少被报告,或许也没有被很好地理解。因此,我们首先描述了系数α和β是如何与基于模型的信度系数欧米茄总系数和欧米茄分层系数类似的。然后,我们用模拟数据演示了这些指数如何在各种数据结构下发挥作用。最后,我们对多维人格问卷的压力反应量表进行了分层聚类分析,估计了聚类形成过程中的α和β。这证明了阿尔法和贝塔的主要优势;它们不需要正式的结构模型。此外,我们还说明了主要基于同质项目群集的量表是如何 "提升 "到具有概念广度并主要反映预期目标结构的可靠分数的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Understanding Alpha and Beta and Sources of Common Variance: Theoretical Underpinnings and a Practical Example.

Coefficient alpha estimates the degree to which scale scores reflect systematic variation due to one or more common dimensions. Coefficient beta, on the other hand, estimates the degree to which scale scores reflect a single dimension common among all the items; that is, the target construct a scale attempts to measure. As such, the magnitude of beta, relative to alpha, informs on the ability to meaningfully interpret derived scale scores as reflecting a single construct. Despite its clear interpretative usefulness, coefficient beta is rarely reported and, perhaps, not well understood. As such, we first describe how coefficient alpha and beta are analogues to model-based reliability coefficients omega total and omega hierarchical. We then demonstrate with simulated data how these indices function under a variety of data structures. Finally, we perform a hierarchical cluster analysis of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire's Stress Reaction Scale, estimating alpha and beta, as clusters form. This demonstrates a chief advantage of alpha and beta; they do not require a formal structural model. Moreover, we illustrate how scales that primarily are based on sets of homogeneous item clusters can "ramp up" to yield reliable scores with conceptual breadth and predominantly reflect the intended target construct.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
8.80%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA) primarily publishes articles dealing with the development, evaluation, refinement, and application of personality assessment methods. Desirable articles address empirical, theoretical, instructional, or professional aspects of using psychological tests, interview data, or the applied clinical assessment process. They also advance the measurement, description, or understanding of personality, psychopathology, and human behavior. JPA is broadly concerned with developing and using personality assessment methods in clinical, counseling, forensic, and health psychology settings; with the assessment process in applied clinical practice; with the assessment of people of all ages and cultures; and with both normal and abnormal personality functioning.
期刊最新文献
Trait Considerations in Clinical Practice: A Commentary Based on Gubler et al. (2024) and Lau et al. (2024). Assessment of Personality Functioning Across Immigrant Groups- Measurement Invariance and Its Association with Mental Distress in a German Population-Based Sample. Comparison of Resilience Measures in Chinese Adolescents: Based on Item Response Theory. Psychometric Evidence and Measurement Invariance by College-Going Status for the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA). Psychometric Properties of the Dutch Version of the Young Positive Schema Questionnaire (YPSQ-NL).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1