The full-scale reliability (internal consistency) was high with Cronbach's α = 0.98 for the full scale and item-total correlations ranging from 0.56 to 0.88.
A weighted kappa of 0.68 for the full scale demonstrated test-retest reliability of the CEQ.
High Cronbach's alpha values for five sub-scales and for the full scale indicate the instrument's reliability, and the consistent performance of expected predictors (i.e., trust in biologists, conspiratorial ideation, and political ideology) demonstrates the instrument's construct validity.
This shorter version of the scale is highly correlated with the full scale (r=0.90) and has good reliability (Cronbach α=0.78).
Available literature for CR has also shown a disparity between apparent promise in short-term lab-scale trials and process reliability at full scale, with full-scale CR's initial successes being better documented than ultimate failures.
The reliability of the SAPAS was estimated using Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest reliability of the full scale was estimated using intra-class correlation.
Analyzing individual items from scales may be not considered as good practice because it lacks the reliability of the full scale, but this is the very concept we are challenging here.
Test-retest reliability for the full scale is good (r = 0.72 – 0.72).
The reliability of the full scale is higher than that of the subscales (Cronbach's alpha = 0.79).
It has a full-scale score reliability of 0.91.
We based quantitative interpretation of all scores on a mean (± SD) of 100 ± 15. Internal consistency reliabilities for the Full Scale, Verbal, and Performance IQ scales are excellent (0.91 0.96) and for the Index factor scores range from 0.85 to 0.94.
