TY - JOUR
T1 - Digit Span Subscale Scores May Be Insufficiently Reliable for Clinical Interpretation
T2 - Distinguishing Between Stratified Coefficient Alpha and Omega Hierarchical
AU - Gignac, Gilles E.
AU - Reynolds, Matthew R.
AU - Kovacs, Kristof
PY - 2019/12
Y1 - 2019/12
N2 - The Digit Span subscale (Digit Span Forward, Backward, and Sequencing combined composite) internal inconsistency reliability has been reported at .93, based on a coefficient known as stratified coefficient alpha. With accessible examples, we demonstrate that stratified coefficient alpha can deviate substantially from a model-based internal consistency reliability that represents an underlying dimension, that is, omega hierarchical. Next, we simulated item-level Digit Span subscale data to correspond very closely to the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-fourth edition normative sample. Based on omega hierarchical, we estimated the internal consistency reliability associated with the Digit Span subscale scores at .74. In light of the results, clinicians are cautioned against interpreting Digit Span subscale scores. Instead, interpretations should probably be restricted to the Digit Span Forward, Digit Span Backward, and Digit Span Sequencing test scores. Finally, we offer suggestions for improvement to achieve higher levels of Digit Span subscale score reliability.
AB - The Digit Span subscale (Digit Span Forward, Backward, and Sequencing combined composite) internal inconsistency reliability has been reported at .93, based on a coefficient known as stratified coefficient alpha. With accessible examples, we demonstrate that stratified coefficient alpha can deviate substantially from a model-based internal consistency reliability that represents an underlying dimension, that is, omega hierarchical. Next, we simulated item-level Digit Span subscale data to correspond very closely to the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-fourth edition normative sample. Based on omega hierarchical, we estimated the internal consistency reliability associated with the Digit Span subscale scores at .74. In light of the results, clinicians are cautioned against interpreting Digit Span subscale scores. Instead, interpretations should probably be restricted to the Digit Span Forward, Digit Span Backward, and Digit Span Sequencing test scores. Finally, we offer suggestions for improvement to achieve higher levels of Digit Span subscale score reliability.
KW - digit span backward
KW - digit span forward
KW - digit span sequencing
KW - memory
KW - reliability
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85072232565
U2 - 10.1177/1073191117748396
DO - 10.1177/1073191117748396
M3 - Article
C2 - 29254353
AN - SCOPUS:85072232565
SN - 1073-1911
VL - 26
SP - 1554
EP - 1563
JO - Assessment
JF - Assessment
IS - 8
ER -