Literature DB >> 23322930

Influences of response rate and distribution on the calculation of interobserver reliability scores.

Natalie U Rolider1, Brian A Iwata, Christopher E Bullock.   

Abstract

We examined the effects of several variations in response rate on the calculation of total, interval, exact-agreement, and proportional reliability indices. Trained observers recorded computer-generated data that appeared on a computer screen. In Study 1, target responses occurred at low, moderate, and high rates during separate sessions so that reliability results based on the four calculations could be compared across a range of values. Total reliability was uniformly high, interval reliability was spuriously high for high-rate responding, proportional reliability was somewhat lower for high-rate responding, and exact-agreement reliability was the lowest of the measures, especially for high-rate responding. In Study 2, we examined the separate effects of response rate per se, bursting, and end-of-interval responding. Response rate and bursting had little effect on reliability scores; however, the distribution of some responses at the end of intervals decreased interval reliability somewhat, proportional reliability noticeably, and exact-agreement reliability markedly.

Keywords:  interobserver agreement; reliability; response distribution; response rate

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23322930      PMCID: PMC3545499          DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2012.45-753

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal        ISSN: 0021-8855


  7 in total

1.  Evaluating interobserver reliability of interval data.

Authors:  B L Hopkins; J A Hermann
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1977

2.  A comparison of frequency, interval, and time-sampling methods of data collection.

Authors:  A C Repp; D M Roberts; D J Slack; C F Repp; M S Berkler
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1976 WINTER

3.  Artifact, bias, and complexity of assessment: the ABCs of reliability.

Authors:  A E Kazdin
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1977

4.  Differences among common methods for calculating interobserver agreement.

Authors:  A C Repp; D E Deitz; S M Boles; S M Deitz; C F Repp
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1976

5.  A method to integrate descriptive and experimental field studies at the level of data and empirical concepts.

Authors:  S W Bijou; R F Peterson; M H Ault
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1968

6.  Modification of severe disruptive and aggressive behavior using brief timeout and reinforcement procedures.

Authors:  D E Bostow; J B Bailey
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1969

7.  Assessing observer accuracy in continuous recording of rate and duration: three algorithms compared.

Authors:  Oliver C Mudford; Neil T Martin; Jasmine K Y Hui; Sarah Ann Taylor
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2009
  7 in total
  1 in total

1.  Assessing the Utility of a Quality-of-Care Assessment Tool Used in Assessing Comprehensive Care Services Provided by Community Health Workers in South Africa.

Authors:  Olukemi Babalola; Jane Goudge; Jonathan Levin; Celia Brown; Frances Griffiths
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-05-16
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.