1
$\begingroup$

I found in the wiki article a definition of a standardized Cronbach's alpha but nothing is said what it is and about its relation to the original Cronbach's alpha:

enter image description here

I found at What is Cronbach's Alpha intuitively? a well explained interpretation of Cronbachs alpha. Does the standardized Cronbach's alpha have the same interpretation? Or is it different?

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Regular alpha is based on covariances.

Standardized alpha is based on correlations (which can be thought of as based on standardized covariances, or standardized variables).

Standardizing the variables makes the variances equal to 1.00 - you don't actually need to standardize the variables, as long as you make the variances all equal (to any value) you will get standardized alpha.

Usually we create a scale score by summing the scores on the items. In this case, alpha is OK.

But, if you have measures with very different scales - e.g. one test is on a 1-7 scale, one is on a 1-100 scale, it doesn't make sense to add these scores together - you should do something to put them on the same scale - like standardizing the variables first. In this case you should use standardized alpha.

The second case is unusual, and so you usually use alpha (not standardized alpha). In addition, items usually have similar variances to start with, so the differences between alpha and standardized alpha are (usually) small.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ So you say, if I replace $Y_i$ with $\tilde{Y}_i = \frac{Y_i - \mu}{\sigma}$ and put it in the regular alpha formel, I get the standardized alpha? $\endgroup$ – Adam Aug 23 '18 at 16:43
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I believe so. $\endgroup$ – Jeremy Miles Aug 23 '18 at 23:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.