Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 267

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sample Size Determination in Test-Retest and Cronbach Alpha Reliability Estimates

Open access
Kennedy, Imasuen·2022·British Journal of Contemporary Education

Abstract

The estimation of reliability in any research is a very important thing. For us to achieve the goal of the research, we are usually faced with the issue of when the measurements are repeated, are we sure we will get the same result? Reliability is the extent to which an experiment, test, or any measuring procedure yields the same result on repeated trials. If a measure is perfectly reliable, there is no error in measurement, that is, everything we observe is the true score. However, it is the amount/degree of error that indicates how reliable, a measurement is. The issue of sample size determination has been a major problem for researchers and psychometricians in reliability studies. Existing approaches to determining sample size for psychometric studies have been varied and are not straightforward. This has made the psychometric literature contain a wide range of articles that propose a variety of sample sizes. This paper investigated sample sizes in test-retest and Cronbach alpha reliability estimates. The study was specifically concerned with identifying and analyzing differences in test-retest and Cronbach alpha reliability estimate of an instrument using various sample sizes of 20,30,40,50,100,150,200,300, and 400. Four hundred and eight (408) senior secondary school students from thirty-eight (38) public senior secondary schools in Benin metropolis part took in the study. The Open Hemisphere Brain Dominance Scale, by Eric Jorgenson was used for data collection. Data were analyzed using Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) and Cronbach alpha. The findings revealed that the sample sizes of 20 and 30 were not reliable, but the reliability of the instrument became stronger when the sample size was at least 100. The interval estimate (Fisher's confidence interval) gave a better reliability estimate than the point estimate for all samples. Based on the findings, it was, therefore, recommended that for a high-reliability estimate, at least one hundred (100) subjects should be used. Observed or field-tested values should always be used in the estimation of the reliability of any measuring instrument, and reliability should not be reported as a point estimate, but as an interval.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.52589/bjce-fy266hk9

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 267

Metadata

Authors
Kennedy, I.
Venue
British Journal of Contemporary Education
Published
2022-02-03
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
17-29
ISSN
2997-3198 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4210650404
Cited by
267
References
29
FWCI
30.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Sample Size Determination in Test-Retest and Cronbach Alpha Reliability Estimates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.52589/bjce-fy266hk9
The paper
Kennedy, I. (2022). Sample Size Determination in Test-Retest and Cronbach Alpha Reliability Estimates. British Journal of Contemporary Education. https://doi.org/10.52589/bjce-fy266hk9

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.