The DOSPERT scale has been used extensively to understand individual differences in risk attitudes across varying decision domains since 2002. The present study reports a reliability generalization meta-analysis to summarize the internal consistency of both the initial and the revised versions of DOSPERT. It also examined factors that can influence the reliability of the DOSPERT and its subscales. A total of 104 samples (N = 30,109) that reported 465 coefficient alphas were analyzed. Results of meta-regression models showed that the overall coefficient alpha of the DOSPERT total scores was satisfactory, regardless of the scale and study characteristics. Coefficient alphas varied significantly across domain subscales, with values ranging from .68 for the social domain to .80 for the recreational domain. In addition, the alpha coefficients of subscales varied significantly depending on various study characteristics. Finally, we report the meta-analysis of the intercorrelations among DOSPERT subscales and reveal that intercorrelations among the subscales are heterogeneous. We discuss the theoretical implications of the present findings.

The Padua Inventory (PI) of obsessions and compulsions is one of the most usually applied tests to assess obsessive-compulsive symptomatology in research contexts as well as for clinical and screening purposes. A reliability generalization meta-analysis was accomplished to estimate the average reliability of the PI scores and to search for characteristics of the samples and studies that can explain the variability among reliability estimates. An exhaustive literature search enabled us to select 39 studies (53 independent samples) that reported alpha and/or test-retest coefficients with the data at hand for the PI total score and subscales. An excellent average coefficient alpha was found for the PI total score (M = .935; 95%CI = .922–.949) and for Impaired Mental Control subscale (M = .911; 95%CI = .897–.924), being good for Contamination (M = .861; 95%CI = .841–.882) and Checking (M = .880; 95%CI = .856–.903), and fair for Urges and Worries (M = .783; 95%CI = .745–.822). The average test-retest reliability for PI total score was also satisfactory (M = .835; 95%CI = .782–.877). Moderator analyses showed larger coefficients alpha for larger standard deviation of the PI total scores (p = .0005; R2 = .46), for adapted versions of the test (p = .002; R2 = .32), and for samples composed of clinical participants (p = .066; R2 = .10). The practical implications of these results are discussed as well as the need for researchers to report reliability estimates with the data at hand.