The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: Effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort
Open accessOverview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Previous research also has shown that a strong friendship tends to inflate over-scoring in peer assessment (Panadero et al., 2013).”
From Does anonymity matter? Examining quality of online peer assessment and students' attitudes (2020) · cites this paper as Panadero et al., 2013
In the citing paper
“Peer assessment has also been shown to be more accurate when rubrics are utilised.”
From The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies (2020) · cites this paper as Panadero, Romero, & Strijbos (2013)
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,882
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams
Edmondson, A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666999 · Cited by 12,026
The Content Analysis Guidebook
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017) · doi:10.4135/9781071802878 · Cited by 9,286
Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data
Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007) · Communication Methods and Measures · doi:10.1080/19312450709336664 · Cited by 4,225
Messick, S. (1995) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.50.9.741 · Cited by 4,198
Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities
Topping, K. (1998) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.2307/1170598 · Cited by 2,173
The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences
Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002 · Cited by 1,509
Barron, B. (2003) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1203_1 · Cited by 1,446
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies
Double, K. S., McGrane, J. A., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09510-3 · Cited by 446
The future of student self-assessment: a review of known unknowns and potential directions.
Panadero, E., Brown, G. T. L., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2016) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9350-2 · Cited by 388
Self-citationPanadero, E., & Roméro, M. (2014) · Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice · doi:10.1080/0969594x.2013.877872 · Cited by 263
Self-citationPanadero, E., & Alqassab, M. (2019) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1600186 · Cited by 232
Self-citationPeer assessment in the digital age: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings
Li, H., Xiong, Y., Zang, X., Kornhaber, M. L., Lyu, Y., Chung, K. S., & Suen, H. K. (2015) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2014.999746 · Cited by 215
Metadata
- Authors
- Panadero, E., Romero, M., & Strijbos, J.-W.
- Affiliations
- Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
- Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Panadero, Ernesto
- Venue
- Studies in Educational Evaluation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-12
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 195-203
- ISSN
- 0191-491X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1989213880
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 70
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6
- FWCI
- 38.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Studies In Educational Evaluation (publishedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- peer assessment, assessment rubrics, construct validity, concept maps, peer feedback, perceived fairness
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
