Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Analiza de fiabilitate multinivel× | Analiza factoriala confirmatorie (CFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Psihometrie | Psihometrie |
| Familie | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Anul apariției≠ | 2014 | 1969 |
| Autorul original≠ | Geldhof, Preacher & Zyphur | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tip≠ | Reliability estimation / psychometric modeling | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Geldhof, G. J., Preacher, K. J., & Zyphur, M. J. (2014). Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework. Psychological Methods, 19(1), 72–91. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative | multilevel omega, within-group reliability, between-group reliability, hierarchical reliability | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Înrudite≠ | 3 | 4 |
| Rezumat≠ | Multilevel reliability analysis estimates the internal consistency of scale scores separately at the within-group (individual) and between-group (cluster) levels. It corrects the bias that arises when ordinary alpha or omega is applied to hierarchically nested data, such as employees within organizations or students within classrooms. | Confirmatory factor analysis tests a researcher-specified factor structure against observed data. Unlike exploratory approaches, the researcher decides in advance which indicators load on which latent factor, and the model is evaluated by how closely the implied covariance matrix reproduces the sample covariance matrix. CFA is central to scale validation, construct validity assessment, and measurement invariance testing. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|