The DOI matches its Crossref record.
THEORY OF GENERALIZABILITY: A LIBERALIZATION OF RELIABILITY THEORY†
Abstract
“Reliability theory” is reinterpreted as a theory regarding the adequac with which one can generalize from one observation to a universe of observations. If the observation is randomly sampled from the universe—whether or not the universe consists of equivalent observations—the intraclass correlation provides an approximate lower bound to the expected value of the desired coefficient of generalizability.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“G-theory, a robust statistical methodology pioneered by Cronbach etal. (1963, 1972), offers a comprehensive analysis of the reliability and generalizability of assessment scores obtained from psychometric scales. It also identifies specific error sources potentially influencing measurements.”
From Investigating state and trait aspects of resilience using Generalizability theory (2024) · cites this paper as Cronbach et al., 1963
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scientific Research in Education
National Research Council (2002) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/10236 · Cited by 1,766
Intraclass Reliability Estimates: Testing Structural Assumptions
Werts, C. E., Linn, R. L., & Jöreskog, K. G. (1974) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316447403400104 · Cited by 1,657
My Current Thoughts on Coefficient Alpha and Successor Procedures
Cronbach, L. J., & Shavelson, R. J. (2004) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164404266386 · Cited by 1,641
Self-citationReliability: A Review of Psychometric Basics and Recent Marketing Practices
Peter, J. P. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150868 · Cited by 1,577
Common methods bias: does common methods variance really bias results?
Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. (1998) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/109442819814002 · Cited by 1,380
Metadata
- Authors
- Cronbach, L. J., Rajaratnam, N., & Gleser, G. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rajaratnam, Nageswari
- Venue
- British Journal of Statistical Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1963-11
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 137-163
- ISSN
- 0950-561X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2023420063
- Cited by
- 737
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 21
- FWCI
- 40.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Statistical Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Keywords
- generalizability theory, reliability theory, intraclass correlation coefficient, random sampling, lower bounds, measurement reliability
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