I think your reliability interpretation is clear and well supported, especially your explanation of how each item contributes to the overall consistency of the scale. Your ...
I think your reliability interpretation is clear and well supported, especially your explanation of how each item contributes to the overall consistency of the scale. Your discussion of US4 is particularly insightful because it connects the statistics to practical questionnaire improvement rather than just reporting the numbers. However, I’m curious about your suggestion to remove US4 for efficiency. Since the reliability is already high and the item still contributes positively, do you think revising the wording might be more beneficial than removing it entirely? It would be interesting to consider how keeping the item could preserve content coverage while still improving clarity.