English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Reliability evidence of test scores is essential in counseling research and program evaluation, as the quality of client care is, in part, based on the proper interpretation of test scores. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha is unquestionably the most frequently reported estimate of internal consistency reliability in counseling research. For over a decade scholars in other disciplines have raised a number of concerns about the utility of coefficient alpha for capturing the reliability of psychological traits, in favor of composite reliability estimates. However, coefficient alpha remains the most dominant reliability index in counseling research. To this end, this article provides a non-technical summary of coefficient alpha, coefficient omega, hierarchical omega, and coefficient  H , guidelines for their appropriate usage, and can serve as a reference for counseling practitioners and researchers when conducting outcome research and program evaluation.

Alpha, Omega, and H Internal Consistency Reliability Estimates: Reviewing These Options and When to Use Them