UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Split-half reliability is obtained by dividing a test into two comparable halves, such as odd and even items, and correlating the scores on these halves. A high correlation indicates that the items within the test are consistently measuring the same construct. This method assesses internal consistency without requiring separate test administrations. Because the stem describes estimating reliability by correlating scores on two halves of the same test, it is clearly referring to split-half reliability.

Option A:
Test–retest reliability involves administering the same test to the same group of individuals on two different occasions and correlating the scores across time. It measures stability over time, not the internal consistency between halves within a single administration. Therefore, test–retest does not match the description in the stem.

Option B:
Parallel forms reliability is established by developing two equivalent versions of a test and correlating the scores obtained on them. It assesses consistency across forms rather than across halves of one form. Since the question mentions halves of the same test, parallel forms is not the correct answer.

Option C:
Split-half reliability directly evaluates how well different items in a single instrument work together to measure a construct by comparing performance on different subsets. This internal consistency focus corresponds exactly to the procedure outlined in the stem, confirming split-half as the appropriate completion.

Option D:
Inter-rater reliability refers to the degree of agreement between different observers or raters when scoring or judging the same behaviour or responses. It deals with consistency across raters rather than across test halves, so inter-rater is not suitable here.

Test–retest reliability evaluates the stability of scores over time by administering the same instrument to the same respondents on two occasions separated by an appropriate interval. High correlation between the two sets of scores suggests that the instrument yields consistent results and is relatively free from random fluctuations. This is especially important for traits expected to remain stable over the tested period. Thus, the reliability described in the stem is test–retest reliability.

Option A:
Split-half reliability examines internal consistency by correlating scores on two halves of the same test administered once, rather than across two occasions. It provides information about item homogeneity, not temporal stability.

Option B:
Test–retest reliability focuses on whether individuals maintain similar relative positions on the test across time under similar conditions. If the scores show strong agreement, the instrument is considered stable. Because the stem mentions administering the same test on two occasions, this option is correct.

Option C:
Inter-rater reliability assesses the level of agreement between different raters or observers who score the same performance, which is a different dimension of reliability from repeated testing.

Option D:
Internal reliability generally refers to consistency among items in the same test, often measured by coefficients like Cronbach’s alpha, and does not involve two separate administrations over time.