SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi / 2004 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 3

It is Incorrect to Speak of "The Reliability of the Test" or "The Test is Reliable"

"Testin Güvenirliği" veya "Test Güvenilirdir" Diye İfade Etmek Doğru Değildir.

Vahit BADEMCİ
Pages
367–373
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Because, reliability is a characteristic of scores or the data in hand, not of the test itself.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:It is incorrect to speak of "the reliability of the test" or " the test is reliable".
📊
Key Findings & Data:It is incorrect to speak of "the reliability of the test" or " the test is reliable".
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Because, reliability is a characteristic of scores or the data in hand, not of the test itself.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

It is incorrect to speak of "the reliability of the test" or " the test is reliable". Because, reliability is a characteristic of scores or the data in hand, not of the test itself.

Özet

"Testin güvenirliği" veya "Test Güvenilirdir" diye ifade etmek doğru değildir. Zira güvenirlik, testin değil, eldeki veriler veya ölçümlerin bir özelliğidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BADEMCİ, V. (2022). It is Incorrect to Speak of "The Reliability of the Test" or "The Test is Reliable". Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 3, 367–373. https://ajindex.com/articles/623324

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Allen, M. J. ve Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction to Measurement Theory. Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole. Arnau, R. C; Thompson, B. ve Rosen, D. H. (1999). Alternative Measures of Jungian Personality Construct. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, Vol. 32,90-104.
  2. Bademci, V. (1999).
  3. Hedefin Davranışlara Çevrilmesi, Davranışlardan Seçmeli Test Maddeleri Yazılması. (Geliştirilmiş Üçüncü Baskı). Ankara:
  4. Gazi Kitabevi.
  5. Capraro, M. M.; Capraro, R. M. ve Henson, R. K. (2001). Measurement Error of Scores on the Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale Across Studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 61, 373-386.
  6. Capraro, R. M. ve Capraro, M. M. (2002). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Score Reliability Across Studies: A Meta-Analytic Reliability Generalization Study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 62, 590-602.
  7. Caruso, J. C. (2000). Reliability Generalization of the Neo Personality Scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 60, 236-254.
  8. Cecil, H. ve Stanley, M. A. (1997). Reliability and Validity of Adolescents' Scores on the Body Esteem Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 57, 340-356.
  9. Crocker, L. ve Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Dawis, R. V. (1987). Scale Construction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 34,481-489.
  10. Ebel, R. L. (1972). Essential of Educational Measurement. (Second Edition). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc. Gronlund, N. E. ve Linn, R. L. (1990). Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching. Sixth Edition. New York: Macmillan. Guilford, J. P. ve Fruchter, B. (1973). Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education. (Fifth Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill. Gulliksen, H. (1950). Theory of Mental Tests. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Henson, R. K. ve Thompson, B. (2002). Characterizing Measurement Error in Scores Across Studies: Some Recommendations for Conducting " Reliability Generalization" Studies. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, Vol. 35, 113-126.
  11. Henson, R. K.; Kogan, L. R. ve Vacha-Haase, T. (2001). A Reliability Generalization Study of the Teacher Efficacy Scale and Related Instruments. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 61,404-420.
  12. Kieffer, K. M. ve Reese, R. J. (2002). A Reliability Generalization Study of the Geriatric Depression Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 62, 969-994.
  13. Knapp, T. R. ve Sawilowsky, S. S. (2001). C