» Articles » PMID: 30914882

A Review on Sample Size Determination for Cronbach's Alpha Test: A Simple Guide for Researchers

Overview
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2019 Mar 28
PMID 30914882
Citations 141
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Reliability studies are commonly used in questionnaire development studies and questionnaire validation studies. This study reviews the sample size guideline for Cronbach's alpha test.

Methods: Manual sample size calculation using Microsoft Excel software and sample size tables were tabulated based on a single coefficient alpha and the comparison of two coefficients alpha.

Results: For a single coefficient alpha test, the approach by assuming the Cronbach's alpha coefficient equals to zero in the null hypothesis will yield a smaller sample size of less than 30 to achieve a minimum desired effect size of 0.7. However, setting the coefficient of Cronbach's alpha larger than zero in the null hypothesis could be necessary and this will yield larger sample size. For comparison of two coefficients of Cronbach's alpha, a larger sample size is needed when testing for smaller effect sizes.

Conclusions: In the assessment of the internal consistency of an instrument, the present study proposed the Cronbach's alpha's coefficient to be set at 0.5 in the null hypothesis and hence larger sample size is needed. For comparison of two coefficients' of Cronbach's alpha, justification is needed whether testing for extremely low and extremely large effect sizes are scientifically necessary.

Citing Articles

Navigating Industry 4.0: Leveraging additive technologies for competitive advantage in Colombian aerospace and manufacturing industries.

Tegethoff T, Santa R, Bucheli J, Cabrera B, Scavarda A PLoS One. 2025; 20(2):e0318339.

PMID: 39928702 PMC: 11809816. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318339.


Validity and reliability of local endemic language version of the SARI Sigma Scale questionnaire for assessing stigma in leprosy patients.

Rahayu T, Friska D, Sopamena Y, Menaldi S, Gibran K, Dadun Front Public Health. 2025; 12():1474745.

PMID: 39845673 PMC: 11750834. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1474745.


Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices in Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Philippines.

Fernandez J, Borlongan M, Baliton M, Sacdalan D, Sy F, Agoncillo A Acta Med Philipp. 2025; 58(22):77-91.

PMID: 39817104 PMC: 11732593. DOI: 10.47895/amp.vi0.8608.


Development of a Standard Tool of Pattern Identification for Functional Dyspepsia: A Cross-Sectional Study from Korea.

Ha N, Ko S, Park J, Kim J Healthcare (Basel). 2024; 12(23).

PMID: 39684953 PMC: 11641813. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12232331.


Cross cultural adaptation and validation of the Hindi version of foot function index.

Sidiq M, Chahal A, Sharma J, Rai R, Kashoo F, Jayavelu J Chiropr Man Therap. 2024; 32(1):38.

PMID: 39639375 PMC: 11619674. DOI: 10.1186/s12998-024-00563-y.


References
1.
Streiner D . Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. J Pers Assess. 2003; 80(1):99-103. DOI: 10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18. View

2.
Berg K, Williams J, Maki B . Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument. Can J Public Health. 1992; 83 Suppl 2:S7-11. View

3.
Jalaludin M, Fuziah M, Hong J, Mohamad Adam B, Jamaiyah H . Reliability and Validity of the Revised Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) for Malaysian Children and Adolescents. Malays Fam Physician. 2015; 7(2-3):10-20. PMC: 4170432. View

4.
Jalaludin M, Fuziah M, Hadhrami M, Janet Y, Jamaiyah H, Mohamad Adam B . Reliability and validity of the Malay translated version of diabetes quality of life for youth questionnaire. Malays Fam Physician. 2015; 8(1):12-9. PMC: 4170462. View

5.
Bujang M, Ismail M, Mohd Hatta N, Othman S, Baharum N, Lazim S . Validation of the Malay version of Diabetes Quality of Life (DQOL) Questionnaire for Adult Population with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Malays J Med Sci. 2017; 24(4):86-96. PMC: 5609693. DOI: 10.21315/mjms2017.24.4.10. View