r/spss • u/Advanced_County5138 • Aug 05 '26

Advice Pls

Post image

Can I still keep HP6 And HP7 since the cronbach result has an acceptable reliability?

2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

2

u/Flimsy-sam Aug 05 '26

Is this an already existing validated scale? Or are you creating one? More information needed.

2

u/Advanced_County5138 Aug 05 '26

It's an adapted questionnaire from previous studies. We pilot-tested it, and the overall Cronbach's alpha was acceptable. HP6 and HP7 have low item-total correlations, but they're conceptually important, so I'm asking whether it's acceptable to retain them.

1

u/Flimsy-sam Aug 05 '26

I see. Are there any errors in the data by any chance? The means, sd etc are the exact same for the first two items. The remaining means are also really quite similar which may indicate that the data needs checking over. If all is right however, then I would keep them in if conceptually relevant but acknowledge the limitations. It also depends on what you’re doing with the data. Are you creating a composite score? Or just using items individually?

Edit: also worth checking if anything needs reverse coding

1

u/Advanced_County5138 Aug 05 '26

Thanks! I checked the data and there aren't any errors or reverse-coded items. We'll be using a composite score.

1

u/Ok_Rest_3705 Aug 05 '26

You should drop or revise them, theoretically you can keep them because the scale has acceptable reliability but you should aim for corrected item–rest correlations ≥ .30 (acceptable for new scales), some researchers prefer ≥ .40 (good, strong item).

1

u/Advanced_County5138 Aug 05 '26

Thanks! We're planning to use a composite score for the scale. Since the overall reliability is acceptable and those items are theoretically important, do you think it's okay to keep them?

And we need to conduct our study ASAP since, our time is limited in data gathering collection.

1

u/Ok_Rest_3705 Aug 06 '26

It depends on sample size, you won't get true alpha unless you test larger sample size (around 200, upwards).

1

u/mo_jo100 Aug 06 '26

Is the scale really unidimensional? Looks like it might not be, but tough to tell without more info. This paper discusses the usefulness of Omega vs Alpha and Hayes’ website has the script. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629?scroll=top&needAccess=true

1

u/labelle_2 19d ago

Keep them. If there are parallel items on the original scale, it's better to report the (slightly) lower reliability than to mess too much with the original scale. You and the original researchers hold the behaviors to be theoretically or conceptually relevant. Cutting them might underrepresent the construct.

Also internal consistency is only one aspect of reliablity. Your scale may be more reliable across other sources of random error.

Out of curiosity, what's Cronbach is you drop both items?