The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Commentary on Coefficient Alpha: A Cautionary Tale
Abstract
The general use of coefficient alpha to assess reliability should be discouraged on a number of grounds. The assumptions underlying coefficient alpha are unlikely to hold in practice, and violation of these assumptions can result in nontrivial negative or positive bias. Structural equation modeling was discussed as an informative process both to assess the assumptions underlying coefficient alpha and to estimate reliability
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications
Cortina, J. M. (1993) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98 · Cited by 8,810 · cited 1×
“The argument against alpha to assess internal consistency is relatively transparent and has been made multiple times in the literature (e.g., Cortina, 1993, Green, Lissitz, & Mulaik, 1977); nevertheless, this interpretation persists.”
BackgroundAn updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378802500207 · Cited by 6,293
Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests
Jöreskog, K. G. (1971) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291393 · Cited by 1,481
The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methodology for the Social Sciences
Kaplan, D. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412986311 · Cited by 1,454
Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7 · Cited by 1,439 · cited 3×
“Zinbarg et al. (2005) showed that alpha is less than reliability for a congeneric measure to the extent that loadings on the general factor are variable.”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Development of Hierarchical Factor Solutions
Schmid, J., & Leiman, J. M. (1957) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289209 · Cited by 1,098
Factor analysis and scale revision.
Reise, S. P., Waller, N. G., & Comrey, A. L. (2000) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.12.3.287 · Cited by 855
The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures
Reise, S. P., Morizot, J., & Hays, R. D. (2007) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9183-7 · Cited by 747
Limitations of Coefficient Alpha as an Index of Test Unidimensionality1
Green, S. B., Lissitz, R. W., & Mulaik, S. A. (1977) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316447703700403 · Cited by 522
Self-citation
Cited by
Use Omega Rather than Cronbach’s Alpha for Estimating Reliability. But…
Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020) · Communication Methods and Measures · doi:10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629 · Cited by 2,675
Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here.
McNeish, D. (2018) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000144 · Cited by 2,533
Psychometric evaluation of the altered states of consciousness rating scale (OAV)
Studerus, E., Gamma, A., & Vollenweider, F. X. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012412 · Cited by 683
Flora, D. B. (2020) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2515245920951747 · Cited by 561
Making Reliability Reliable: A Systematic Approach to Reliability Coefficients
Cho, E. (2016) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428116656239 · Cited by 378
Metadata
- Authors
- Green, S. B., & Yang, Y.
- Venue
- Psychometrika
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 121-135
- ISSN
- 0033-3123 (ISSN-L)
- 1860-0980
- OpenAlex
- W2149712351
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 9
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Commentary on Coefficient Alpha: A Cautionary Tale. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11336-008-9098-4
- The paper
- Green, S. B., & Yang, Y. (2009). Commentary on Coefficient Alpha: A Cautionary Tale. Psychometrika. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9098-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
