Assuming item parameters on a test are known constants, the reliability coefficient for item response theory (IRT) ability estimates is defined for a population of examinees in two different ways: as (a) the product-moment correlation between ability estimates on two parallel forms of a test and (b) the squared correlation between the true abilities and estimates. Due to the bias of IRT ability estimates, the parallel-forms reliability coefficient is not generally equal to the squared-correlation reliability coefficient. It is shown algebraically that the parallel-forms reliability coefficient is expected to be greater than the squared-correlation reliability coefficient, but the difference would be negligible in a practical sense.

Maximum likelihood factor analysis provides an effective method for estimation of factor matrices and a useful test statistic in the likelihood ratio for rejection of overly simple factor models. A reliability coefficient is proposed to indicate quality of representation of interrelations among attributes in a battery by a maximum likelihood factor analysis. Usually, for a large sample of individuals or objects, the likelihood ratio statistic could indicate that an otherwise acceptable factor model does not exactly represent the interrelations among the attributes for a population. The reliability coefficient could indicate a very close representation in this case and be a better indication as to whether to accept or reject the factor solution.