IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v20y1996i5p580-595.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Two-Unit Reliability Analysis of Questionnaires Used in a Regulatory System

Author

Listed:
  • Rachel Fleishman

    (JDC-Brookdale Institute of Gerontology and Human Development, Israel)

  • Dror Walk

    (JDC-Brookdale Institute of Gerontology and Human Development, Israel)

  • Gad Mizrahi

    (JDC-Brookdale Institute of Gerontology and Human Development, Israel)

  • Miriam Bar-Giora

    (Services for the Aged of the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, Israel)

Abstract

An interjudge reliability test was conducted to evaluate the questionnaires used in the surveillance of residential care institutions. Because the reliability test was carried out as part of the routine surveillance program and not as part of a controlled experiment, it was subject to deviations from the optimal reliability test model. However, this nonpure design provided an opportunity to not only examine the reliability of the items in the surveillance tool, but also to gain a better understanding of the use of a reliability test in an "imperfect" field setting. Two different surveyor teams administered the 257 questions on the questionnaires to a representative sample of 32 institutions on two separate occasions. In order to explain the variance in the reliability scores, a multivariate analysis was conducted for two units of analysis: the surveillance questions and the institutions. Based on the results of the reliability test, changes were introduced to improve the questionnaires and their administration.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachel Fleishman & Dror Walk & Gad Mizrahi & Miriam Bar-Giora, 1996. "Two-Unit Reliability Analysis of Questionnaires Used in a Regulatory System," Evaluation Review, , vol. 20(5), pages 580-595, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:20:y:1996:i:5:p:580-595
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9602000506
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9602000506
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X9602000506?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:20:y:1996:i:5:p:580-595. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.