The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Initial Scale Development: Sample Size for Pilot Studies
Abstract
Pilot studies are often recommended by scholars and consultants to address a variety of issues, including preliminary scale or instrument development. Specific concerns such as item difficulty, item discrimination, internal consistency, response rates, and parameter estimation in general are all relevant. Unfortunately, there is little discussion in the extant literature of how to determine appropriate sample sizes for these types of pilot studies. This article investigates the choice of sample size for pilot studies from a perspective particularly related to instrument development. Specific recommendations are made for researchers regarding how many participants they should use in a pilot study for initial scale development.
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
“Johanson & Brooks (2010) did recommend a sample size of 12 participants per arm for pilot trials.”
From A Feasibility and Pilot Randomised Dismantling Trial of the Efficacy of Self-As-Context During Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. (2021) · cites this paper as Johanson & Brooks (2010)
In the citing paper
“As the current study was below the average (Billingham etal., 2013) and below the recommended (Johanson & Brooks, 2010) sample size”
From A Feasibility and Pilot Randomised Dismantling Trial of the Efficacy of Self-As-Context During Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. (2021) · cites this paper as Johanson & Brooks, 2010
Citations
Cites
Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study
Julious, S. A. (2005) · Pharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1002/pst.185 · Cited by 3,068
Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies
Hertzog, M. A. (2008) · Research in Nursing & Health · doi:10.1002/nur.20247 · Cited by 2,337
Handbook in research and evaluation
(1971) · Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0005-7894(71)80129-6 · Cited by 1,488
Bootstrapping: A Nonparametric Approach to Statistical Inference.
Aa, Mooney, C. Z., & Duval, R. D. (1994) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290969 · Cited by 1,365
Mooney, C., & Duval, R. (1993) · doi:10.4135/9781412983532 · Cited by 893
Statistical Inference for Coefficient Alpha
Feldt, L. S., Woodruff, D. J., & Salih, F. A. (1987) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/014662168701100107 · Cited by 526
van Belle, G. (2002) · Wiley-Interscience eBooks · Cited by 461
Nelson, L. S. (2003) · Journal of Quality Technology · doi:10.1080/00224065.2003.11980200 · Cited by 422
WHAT SAMPLE SIZE is "ENOUGH" in INTERNET SURVEY RESEARCH?
Hill, R. L., & Hamilton, W. P. (1998) · Cited by 359
By Design: Planning Research on Higher Education.
Centra, J. A., Light, R. L., Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (1991) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.2307/1982292 · Cited by 266
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Crocker, L., 1986, Classical and modern test theory
- Hill, R., 1998, Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 6
- Lowry, R., 2008, VassarStats: Website for statistical calculation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–998 of 998
Chang, H., Tang, H., Cheng, Y., Sun, L. (., Wong, I., & You, W. (2026) · Geriatric Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2026.103905
Jindal, B., Li, X., Stubbs, M., & Sari, E. F. (2026) · Cancer Nexus · doi:10.1002/cnx2.70017
Comprehensive mental and cognitive health screening: A novel approach
Vyas, S. K. (2026) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-025-08559-4
“The current sample size falls within established ranges for pilot questionnaire development and reliability assessment (Johanson & Brooks, 2010; Bujang et al., 2024), given that pilot studies prioritize feasibility assessment and preliminary psychometric evaluation (Thabane et al., 2010; Ying et…”
Wang, Q., Ginting, M. L., Ho, E. Y., Goh, S. F., Gao, J., Tan, W. S., Ding, Y. Y., Ng, W. L. D., Ng, J. C. A., Kwek, S. C., et al. (2026) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/84257
“Recommendations of sample size vary depending on the primary objective of the study, the feasibility parameter being evaluated, or clinical scale evaluation [63-66].”
Hu, W., Yang, X., Zhang, L. R., Yang, M., & Cao, S. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1723867
Endüstri 4.0’ın Gelişmekte Olan Ülkelerde Benimsenmesi: Ölçek Geliştirme ve Ampirik Doğrulama
Düzgün, S. S., Özen, Ü., & Fındık, D. (2025) · DergiPark (Istanbul University)
La técnica stop motion como mediadora del aprendizaje científico
Álvarez-Coto, G. G., Arana-Cuenca, A., & López, V. P. (2026) · El Guiniguada · doi:10.20420/elguiniguada.2026.830
Li, S. (2026) · The EUrASEANs journal on global socio-economic dynamics · doi:10.35678/2539-5645.11.1.2026.206
Effects of motivation and performance on comfort perception of sportswear
Bozkurt, T. M., & Özkan, E. T. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-026-40239-6
“The literature emphasizes that small sample sizes allow for more controlled observation of research variables and increase the precision of experimental processes 19,20 .”
Development of the cyberchondria severity scale in pregnancy (CSS-P)
Özer, E., & Güvenç, G. (2026) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-026-08833-8
“They were also asked to provide suggestions for improvement, including commenting on any difficulties they encountered in completing the scale and indicating any additional item statements they thought were missing or items that should be deleted [22, 23].”
Mazroui, N. A., Kousa, N., Baldawi, M. M. A., Alsaeed, A. A. A., Ibrahim, R. M., Mazrouei, N. A., Ahmed, M. H., Saeed, A. A., & Badi, S. (2026) · Sustainable Futures · doi:10.1016/j.sftr.2026.101754
Kovacs, J., & Garai-Fodor, H. M. (2026) · The Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management · doi:10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/521-2/2026.302
Abolfathpour, P., Dahouri, A., Hosseinzadeh, M., & Soheili, S. (2026) · International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ijans.2026.101031
Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Functional Vision Scale for Adults
Temuçin, K., & Akı, E. (2026) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare14070852
“The pilot sample size exceeded commonly recommended methodological minimums for initial testing and was therefore considered sufficient [21].”
HAKEM ALIŞTIRMA ALIŞKANLIKLARI FORMU (HAAF): YENİ BİR ÖLÇME ARACININ TANITIMI
Yaşli, B. Ç., Satman, M. C., Tuncel, O., & Karayiğit, R. (2026) · Ankara Üniversitesi Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Yüksekokulu SPORMETRE Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.33689/spormetre.1815593
Ke, Z., Meng, X., Xu, J., & Mustafa, M. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0347418
“Before the official release of the survey questionnaire, a pilot test was conducted to assess the clarity of items and their logical coherence [91,92].”
Jan, S. Q., Junfeng, J., & Iqbal, M. B. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.106781
The development and validation of the digital intelligence scale for students
Savarimuthu, J. R. (2026) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-026-14003-2 · Cited by 2
“This sample size exceeded the minimum recommended threshold of 30 participants for preliminary reliability testing (Johanson & Brooks, 2010).”
Rodda, S. E., McAinch, C., Hunter, J., Saxby, E., Kirsa, S. W., Pianko, S., Bell, S., & Le, S. T. T. (2026) · International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy · doi:10.1007/s11096-026-02151-x
“This helped support and explain the experimental findings and identify changes needed prior to wider implementation [24].”
Ibraeva, G. R., Sergeeva, O. V., ZHELTUKHINA, M. R., Gribova, Y. V., Kelina, K. G., & Sokolova, N. L. (2026) · Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies · doi:10.30935/ojcmt/18492
Tonido, K. J., & Laya, M. (2026) · Psychology and Education A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.70838/pemj.550803
Zhang, X., Liu, Y. H., Sun, J., Chen, Y., Zhang, X., Guo, J., Ren, H., Liu, P., Wang, C., & Zhang, D. (2026) · Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2026.1697750
“This study is an exploratory trial and does not require sample size calculations (44).”
Pratama, R. A., & Kanadlı, S. (2026) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-026-10158-z
Chen, L., Ahmad, S. N. B., Sondoh, S. L., & Lim, M. F. (2026) · Cogent Social Sciences · doi:10.1080/23311886.2026.2666456
Bujang, M. A. (2026) · Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1177/02537176261447652
Atingabili, S., Chen, H., Mensah, I. A., Arboh, F., Kewou, N. Y. N., & Tackie, E. A. (2026) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-026-09523-6
“Specifically, according to Johanson and Brooks (2010) and Hertzog ( 2008 ) it is recommended to use approximately 10% of the intended sample size for the main study, as this proportion allows researchers to adequately test the feasibility, reliability and clarity of the research instrument while…”
Nguyen, M. T. H., Thuc, L. D., & Nguyen, T.-T.-H. (2026) · Engineering Construction & Architectural Management · doi:10.1108/ecam-09-2025-1579
Namahoot, K. S. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.6828232
Putri, A. N. A., Hermawan, P., Mirzanti, I. R., Meadows, M., & Ashiru, F. Y. (2026) · Systemic Practice and Action Research · doi:10.1007/s11213-026-09767-0
“…and structure were guided by three considerations: pilot study recommenda - tions of 10 to 40 participants for testing methodological procedures (Johanson & Brooks, 2010 ); the principle of information power, by which smaller samples may be sufficient when participants hold specific expertise…”
Huijs, E., van der Sman, L., Wirken, L., Delcliseur, H. S. M. J., Winter, E. G., de Roos, N. M., van der Molen, R. G., Oosterman, J. M., Viganò, P., Horne, A. W., et al. (2026) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2026-116964
Kim, H. D., Park, M.-S., Kim, W., Lee, J., Lim, M. H., 채수미, Lee, D.-W., & Kim, H.-C. (2026) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-026-27864-6 · Cited by 1
“According to Johanson and Brooks, although statistical power increases with sample size, the gain is not linear; therefore, they recommend approximately 30 participants per arm for feasibility studies [15].”
Hastuti, W. S., Putri, A. S., & Kusumah, S. A. (2026) · Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education · doi:10.29333/ejmste/18711
“Although relatively small, this pilot size is considered adequate for preliminary testing aimed at evaluating item clarity, administration procedures, and initial reliability, rather than for statistical generalization (Hertzog, 2008; Johanson & Brooks, 2010).”
Eren, M. G., Koçer, S., & Sert, H. (2026) · Geriatric Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2026.104132
Cardamone, E., Fiori, F., Carioni, G., Iacoponi, F., Rossi, L., Silano, M., Agrimi, U., & Parpinel, M. T. (2026) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2026.1817542
“Although many studies consider a sample size of around 30 participants sufficient for similar pilot studies (14–16), the present study involved a convenience sample of 52 participants, providing a broader basis for preliminary evaluation.”
Dwikat, R. M. B., Subramaniam, P., Natour, Y. S., & Sharma, S. (2026) · Journal of Voice · doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2026.05.017
Tatarhan, M., Erdem, A., & Erdem, Ş. (2026) · Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.46778/goputeb.1909888
Shukla, B., Sheth, M., Jani, J., Panda, A., Lakshmi, P., & Chari, D. N. (2026) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2026.2691602
“The recommendations by Johanson and Brooks (Johanson and Brooks 2010) and the scale’s eventual objective of use by academics with varying levels of experience drove the decision regarding sample size estimation.”
Abdi, O. O. H., Jama, A. A., & Abdi, A. I. (2026) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2026.1837023
Mochere, I. K., & Degu, A. (2026) · Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics · doi:10.1155/jcpt/1766313
Yang, Q., & Fang, B. (2026) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci16070302 · Cited by 1
Stige, S. H., Rønnestad, M. H., Oddli, H. W., Doorn, K. A., Nissen‐Lie, H. A., & Visted, E. (2026) · Psychotherapy Research · doi:10.1080/10503307.2026.2689630
Customer acceptance and objection of mobile AR shopping apps: a dual-path analysis
Vu, H. T. M., & Foroughi, B. (2026) · Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration · doi:10.1108/apjba-01-2026-0025
When screens overwhelm: how religiosity anchors student identity and social development
Mensah, E. G., Owusu, M., & Asante, E. F. (2026) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2026.2693444
McNamara, S., Cranley, L., Kilpatrick, K., & Parry, M. J. E. (2026) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2026-116695
“Johanson and Brooks 59 (2010) discussed sample sizes for revisions of existing scales.”
Zhang, E., Zhang, Z., Li, X., Li, J., & Liu, H. (2026) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1002/jcal.70288
Raharti, R., Andika, A., & Anisah, T. N. (2026) · Economics and Culture · doi:10.2478/jec-2026-0002
“The sample size aligns with methodological recommendations that 20–30 participants are sufficient to detect issues in wording, translation, and construct interpretation during instrument pretesting (Johanson & Brooks, 2010).”
Regalado-Gutiérrez, O. A., Carrión‐Nessi, F. S., Ocanto-Yztúriz, M. A., Ciaccio, L. M. R.-D., Rondón-Pérez, A. H., & Forero-Peña, D. A. (2026) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-026-15078-w
“This approach is considered appropriate for pilot studies focused on instrument validation, where the primary goal is to assess psychometric properties rather than population-level prevalence [18, 19].”
The technological edge: adoption of technology innovation and organizational performance
Abdelwahed, N. A. A., Soomro, F. A., Bano, S., & Doghan, M. A. A. (2026) · Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management · doi:10.1108/jstpm-10-2024-0394
UNGUREANU, C.-E., Fleacă, B., Dobrescu, R. M., & Fleacă, E. (2026) · Systems · doi:10.3390/systems14070832
Psychological Well-Being of P-Hailing Workers among Youth in the Klang Valley: A Preliminary Study
Dahalan, D., Abdullah, H. B., Ma’rof, A. A., D’Silva, J. L., & Arshad, M. M. (2026) · Pertanika Journal of Youth and Community Development · doi:10.47836/pjycd.1.1.04
Dulamit, C., & Dzulkifli, D. N. A. K. (2026) · International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Management Practices · doi:10.35631/ijepc.1163069
Development of the ITAKI II Fall Risk Assessment Scale and Evaluation of Its Psychometric Properties
Barış, V. K., İntepeler, Ş. S., Çelik, İ., Bektaş, M., ENGELOĞLU, Ş., & Kavak, D. G. (2026) · Etkili Hemşirelik Dergisi · doi:10.46483/jnef.1650796
Jang, R., Yang, C., Kim, J., Nam, D., Shin, J.-C., Park, G.-C., Kang, B.-K., Shin, K.-M., & Kim, A.-R. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0353654
“In a three-arm pilot study, the adequate sample size is more than 12 [28,29].”
From Human to Hybrid: Artificial Intelligence and the Transformation of Language Services
Tavares, C., de Oliveira, L. G., & Neves, R. (2026) · Societies · doi:10.3390/soc16080236
Sultana, R., Naeem, J., Dey, N. R., Tayaba, M., Imran, S. M., & Roy, N. (2026) · Health Science Reports · doi:10.1002/hsr2.72880
Elliason, E. K., & Patheja, S. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10530538/v1
Psychosocial profiles of bystander resuscitation among Macao residents: a latent profile analysis
Wong, K. K., Che, S. L., Mao, A., & Chao, K. K. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1867128
The Development of an Instrument to Measure Burnout Among Counselors-in-Training
Floyd, J. M., & Merlin‐Knoblich, C. (2026) · Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development · doi:10.1080/07481756.2026.2700722
Student-Team Collaboration Scale in Healthcare: A Scale Development Study
Akan, D. D., Demi̇rbağ, S., & Baysal, E. (2026) · Bandırma Onyedi Eylül Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri ve Araştırmaları Dergisi · doi:10.46413/boneyusbad.1667335
Logical construction of creative thinking in scientific cognition
Пернебекова, Д., Atash, B., Аскар, Л., & Amirkulova, Z. (2026) · Open Education Studies · doi:10.1515/edu-2025-0166
“The use of 30 participants was consistent with the minimum commonly applied in initial questionnaire-development pilot studies (Johanson and Brooks 2010).”
Miranda-Becerra, J. N., García, R. C., Sánchez-García, J. P., Aguilar-Meza, J. P., & Vázquez‐Villegas, P. (2026) · Social Sciences & Humanities Open · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.103443
Aldahwan, N. S., Abdullah, R., & Alshehri, A. (2026) · International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Computer Science (ICECCS) · doi:10.1109/iceccs70432.2026.11651134
“A pilot study with 25 participants was conducted to test reliability [33], [34].”
Sunpiang, Y., & Amatan, M. A. (2026) · GEOGRAFI · doi:10.37134/geografi.vol14.1.4.2026
Effect of Students’ Attitude and Anxiety on Mathematics Achievements in the Schools of Kailali
Shrma, B. P. (2025) · Dinkum Journal of Social Innovations · doi:10.71017/djsi.4.08.d-0515
Kremer, P. A., Kremer, S., & Kremer, G. E. O. (2026) · ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition · doi:10.18260/1-2--60455
Sporda Şike Algısı Ölçeği (SŞAÖ): Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması
Ötkan, C. Ç. (2026) · Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.61962/bsd.1997267
Sivvas, G., Emmanouılıdou, K., Pitsi, A., Masadis, G., Koufou, N., Filippou, K., Varsamis, P., Derri, V., & Filippou, F. (2026) · Participatory Educational Research · doi:10.17275/per.26.73.13.5
CONVINCED BUT UNPREPARED: A PILOT MEASUREMENT OF CYBERSECURITY PREPAREDNESS IN SLOVAK SMES
Sopko, J., & Šafár, L. (2026) · Financial and credit activity problems of theory and practice · doi:10.55643/fcaptp.4.69.2026.5291
Sevinç, Y., Gültekin, Y. S., & Deniz, T. (2026) · Fire · doi:10.3390/fire9090374
“…there is no universally accepted sample size for pilot studies, previous methodological research suggests that pilot samples ranging from 20 to 40 participants are generally sufficient to evaluate questionnaire clarity, feasibility, and preliminary reliability prior to the main survey [39,41].”
Vargas, E., Ucat, S. D., & Matutinao, P. M. (2026) · Journal of interdisciplinary perspectives · doi:10.69569/jip.2026.336
Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., Au-Yong, C. P., Awang, N. A., Peng, Y., Woon, K. S., & Chow, M. F. (2026) · Engineering Construction & Architectural Management · doi:10.1108/ecam-04-2026-0602
Ayyıldız, T. K., Emiroğlu, K. A., & Özsavran, M. (2026) · Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1177/13591053261483885
Aburumman, A. M., & Ilias, N. (2026) · Journal of Health Organization and Management · doi:10.1108/jhom-05-2026-0545
Istijanović, L., Kopuz, D., & Lakić, N. (2026) · Zbornik radova Departmana za geografiju turizam i hotelijerstvo · doi:10.5937/zbdght2601054i
“The to - tal sample included 123 participants, which exceeded the commonly suggested pilot sample sizes in social science research (Johanson & Brooks, 2010).”
Vergara, C. R. (2026) · International Journal of ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES · doi:10.21833/ijaas.2026.07.025
Lu, X., & Xu, L. (2026) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2026.101639
How generative AI shapes eco-friendly accommodation choices
Foroughi, B. (2026) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-03-2026-0332
YAPAY ZEKA KABUL ÖLÇEĞİNİN TÜRKÇEYE UYARLANMASI: HEKİMLER ÜZERİNE BİR ÇALIŞMA
UYANIK, K. C., & TARCAN, G. Y. (2026) · Hacettepe sağlık idaresi dergisi · doi:10.61859/hacettepesid.1890465
Rondot-Rude, V., Caldas, J. C., Pointoux, M., & Pinto, J. O. (2026) · Applied Neuropsychology Adult · doi:10.1080/23279095.2026.2734786
T.M.S.P.K., T., Ulluwishewa, R., Peiris, I. K., U.H, K., Wijesekara, P. D., & Paranamana, G. K. (2026) · OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development · doi:10.64211/oidaijsd190920
Guggemos, J., & Göller, M. (2026) · Human Resource Development Quarterly · doi:10.1002/hrdq.70032
Atif, K., Ahmad, A., Khan, A. U., Khan, A., Ullah, A., Amjad, M. U., Khan, M. T., Kakakhel, M., Qasim, M., Shakoor, M. T. B., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1968305 · Cited by 1
“The questionnaire was pilot-tested on 36 students, approximately 10% of the intended analytic sample, meeting the accepted guidance for pilot work of this kind (32, 33).”
Tahir, M. Z., & Mughal, F. (2026) · Strategy and Leadership · doi:10.1108/sl-05-2026-0252
Adsul, N., Aziz, R., Sivakami, M., Bhui, K. S., & Kapilashrami, A. (2026) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2026-120912
Li, Y., Zhang, J., Chen, L., Zhang, Z., & Yang, Y. (2026) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app16199774
Jung, Y.-J. (2026) · International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science · doi:10.1016/j.ijgfs.2026.101687
Nugroho, M. A., Saputra, M., & Panduwiyasa, H. (2026) · International Conference on ICT for Smart Society (ICISS) · doi:10.1109/iciss71466.2026.11715281
Chianchana, C., Korakotjintanakarn, P., & Swangjang, S. (2026) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2026.e45568
Can User Awareness through Visual Feedback increase the Tolerable Delay in VoIP Calls?
Thou, H., Dutta, A. K., Raman, B., & Rajamanickam, V. (2026) · International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI) · doi:10.1145/3821581.3833131
Wang, X., Kim, Y. G., Ding, X., & Zhen, Z. (2026) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su182010307
Chen, Y., Liang, R., & Zhang, L. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16101875
“Prior to the main survey, the questionnaire was pilot‑ tested with 30 parents from the target population using the same online administration format, consistent with commonly cited recommendations for preliminary questionnaire pilot testing (Johanson & Brooks, 2010).”
Ferriols, A. C. (2026) · QualiSearch Journal of Educational Research and Practice · doi:10.66437/qjerp.v2i10.034
Mason, K. N., Dillon, K., Arzbecker, L. J., & Kotlarek, K. J. (2026) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/2026_ajslp-26-00250
Bedada, D., Ferede, B., & Debelo, D. B. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-02284-1
“This sample size aligns with the recommendation in the previous literature, which suggests that a pilot study should represent approximately 10% [51].”
Praveena, S. M., Aris, A. Z., & Nafisyah, A. L. (2026) · Aquatic Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10452-026-10374-3
Metadata
- Authors
- Johanson, G. A., & Brooks, G. P.
- Affiliations
- Ohio University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Johanson, George A.
- Venue
- Educational and Psychological Measurement
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-12-18
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 394-400
- ISSN
- 0013-1644 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3888
- OpenAlex
- W1984294110
- Cited by
- 1,012
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 134 · 2025: 115 · 2024: 110 · 2023: 99 · 2022: 89 · 2021: 104 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 9.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational and Psychological Measurement (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Keywords
- pilot study, sample size determination, scale development, instrument development, item difficulty, item discrimination, internal consistency, response rate, parameter estimation
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