The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validity in quantitative content analysis
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology.
Shelley, M., & Krippendorff, K. (1984) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288384 · Cited by 24,312
Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology
Krippendorff, K. (2019) · doi:10.4135/9781071878781 · Cited by 15,448
The critical incident technique.
Flanagan, J. C. (1954) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0061470 · Cited by 8,191
Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores
Rozeboom, W. W., Lord, F. M., Novick, M. R., & Birnbaum, A. (1969) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162101 · Cited by 8,022
Review of research in education
Shulman, L. S., Mowry, S., & Berliner, D. C. (1973) · F.E. Peacock eBooks · Cited by 7,754
Educational Research: An Introduction
Dale, R. R., & Borg, W. R. (1965) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3119062 · Cited by 7,198
Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6 · Cited by 6,619
Self-citationAn Experimental Application of the DELPHI Method to the Use of Experts
Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1963) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.9.3.458 · Cited by 6,061
Educational Research: An Introduction
Bennett, N., Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1984) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3121583 · Cited by 5,595
(2007) · Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.4135/9781412952651.n55 · Cited by 5,287
Cited by
Qualitative Content Analysis: A Focus on Trustworthiness
Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014) · Sage Open · doi:10.1177/2158244014522633 · Cited by 4,395
Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001 · Cited by 1,653
Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review
De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (2006) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.005 · Cited by 940
Content analysis: What are they talking about?
Strijbos, J.-W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.002 · Cited by 538
A re-examination of the community of inquiry framework: Social network and content analysis
Shea, P., Hayes, S., Vickers, J., Gozza-Cohen, M., Uzuner, S., Mehta, R., Valchova, A., & Rangan, P. (2010) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.002 · Cited by 300
Metadata
- Authors
- Rourke, L., & Anderson, T.
- Venue
- Educational Technology Research and Development
- Published
- 2004-03
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-18
- ISSN
- 1042-1629 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-6501
- OpenAlex
- W2066194268
- Cited by
- 444
- References
- 74
- FWCI
- 87.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validity in quantitative content analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf02504769
- The paper
- Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02504769
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
