The Use Of Cronbach Alpha Reliability Estimate In Research Among Students In Public Universities In Ghana.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the use of Cronbach alpha reliability estimate in research among university students in Ghana. An exploratory research design was employed in the study. University students’ (both undergraduate and post-graduate) research works were selected from three public universities in Ghana. With the use of inclusion criteria, purposive sampling technique was used to sample 100 research works conducted by students. The sampled research works were examined to evaluate how the students used Cronbach alpha reliability estimate. It was revealed that 91% of the works properly satisfied the conditions for the use of Cronbach alpha. However, 81% of the students calculated for the alpha for multiple constructs which suggests that alpha was treated as a measure of multidimensionality instead of internal consistency. It is recommended that applied courses in research and statistics should be mounted in the various public universities in Ghana. Workshops and seminars should also be organized for both students and lecturers on the use of Cronbach alpha reliability estimate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it