Leifeng Xiao and Kit-Tai Hau’s article, “Performance of Coefficient Alpha and Its Alternatives: Effects of Different Types of Non-Normality,” examines how coefficient alpha and other reliability indices perform under varying conditions of non-normality. The study offers critical insights into how these measures behave across different data structures, providing useful recommendations for researchers handling diverse data types.
Background
Reliability estimation is a cornerstone of psychometric research, and coefficient alpha has traditionally been one of the most commonly used indices. However, alpha assumes continuous and normally distributed data, conditions that are often violated in practice. Xiao and Hau’s research addresses these limitations by evaluating alternatives such as ordinal alpha, omega total, omega RT, omega h, GLB, and coefficient H. Their findings offer practical guidance for researchers working with non-normal data, including Likert-type scales.
Key Insights
- Performance on Continuous Data: Coefficient alpha and its alternatives performed well for strong scales, even under non-normal conditions. Bias was acceptable for moderately non-normal data but increased significantly for weaker scales.
- Findings for Likert-Type Scales: For discrete data, indices generally performed acceptably with four or more points on the scale. Greater numbers of points improved accuracy, especially in conditions of severe non-normality.
- Robust Alternatives: Omega RT and GLB showed robust performance across exponentially distributed data. However, for binomial-beta distributions, most indices demonstrated significant bias.
Significance
The study provides valuable guidance for researchers choosing reliability measures for different types of data. It challenges the assumption that data must always be continuous and normally distributed for coefficient alpha to perform well, suggesting that these requirements may not be necessary under mild non-normality. For severely non-normal data, the authors recommend using scales with four or more points to improve reliability estimates.
Future Directions
Xiao and Hau highlight the need for continued evaluation of reliability measures under diverse conditions. They note that no single reliability index is universally applicable and suggest that future research should investigate the effects of other factors, such as scale length and factor loadings, on reliability estimation. These efforts could lead to improved methodologies and tools for psychometric analysis.
Conclusion
This study underscores the importance of selecting appropriate reliability measures based on the characteristics of the data. By evaluating the performance of coefficient alpha and its alternatives, Xiao and Hau contribute to a deeper understanding of how non-normality affects reliability estimation. Their findings offer practical recommendations for researchers seeking accurate and meaningful reliability indices across varied contexts.
Reference
Xiao, L., & Hau, K.-T. (2023). Performance of Coefficient Alpha and Its Alternatives: Effects of Different Types of Non-Normality. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 83(1), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644221088240
