The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Three Coefficients for Analyzing the Reliability and Validity of Ratings
Abstract
Three numerical coefficients (V, R, and H) for analyzing the validity and reliability of ratings are described. Each coefficient, which ranges in value from 0 to 1, is computed as the ratio of an obtained to a maximum sum of differences in ratings, or as 1 minus that ratio. Computer programs for calculating the coefficients, their associated individual and cumulative right-tail probabilities, and the population mean and standard deviation of each coefficient are available. Tables of the individual and right-tail probabilities for selected values of the three coefficients are included for 2 to 7 rating categories and 2 to 25 items or raters. More complete probability tables can be generated for any value of c, m, or n with one of the computer programs provided. When the number of items or raters is large (>25), the right-tail probability associated with any value of a coefficient may be estimated by a z-score procedure. The three coefficients are applicable not only to validity and reliability (test-retest and internal consistency) determinations but also to the item analysis, agreement analysis, and cluster or factor analysis of rating-scale data.
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
Moran, P. A. P., & Kendall, M. G. (1973) · International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique · doi:10.2307/1402637 · Cited by 4,054
Bevan, J. M., & Kendall, M. G. (1971) · The Statistician · doi:10.2307/2986801 · Cited by 2,436
Content Validity and Reliability of Single Items or Questionnaires
Aiken, L. R. (1980) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316448004000419 · Cited by 620
Self-citationModels for testing the significance of combined results.
Jones, L. V., & Fiske, D. W. (1953) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0057844 · Cited by 137
Cited by
The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 · Cited by 13,448
The Assessment of Present-Moment Awareness and Acceptance: The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale
Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191107311467 · Cited by 940
Applying a Score Confidence Interval to Aiken's Item Content-Relevance Index
Penfield, R. D., & Giacobbi, Jr. (2004) · Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science · doi:10.1207/s15327841mpee0804_3 · Cited by 400
The Development and Validation of the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale
Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., & Rouse, S. V. (2016) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2015.1068174 · Cited by 386
Sahdra, B. K., Shaver, P. R., & Brown, K. W. (2010) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223890903425960 · Cited by 352
Metadata
- Authors
- Aiken, L. R.
- Venue
- Educational and Psychological Measurement
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1985-03
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 131-142
- ISSN
- 0013-1644 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3888
- OpenAlex
- W2146456356
- Cited by
- 1,353
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 2.57
- 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: Three Coefficients for Analyzing the Reliability and Validity of Ratings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0013164485451012
- The paper
- Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three Coefficients for Analyzing the Reliability and Validity of Ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164485451012
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.
