Cited by 2,139Reliability and Agreement in MeasurementPsychometric Methodologies and TestingSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement.

James, Lawrence R.·1982·Journal of Applied Psychology

Abstract

It is shown that estimates of agreement based on group mean scores have been incorrectly interpreted as applying to perceptual agreement among individuals. Of initial importance is a study by Drexler (1977), who concluded that a considerable proportion of the variance in climate perceptions is accounted for by organizational membership. This conclusion has been employed recently by other authors to support the assumption that individuals in the same environment tend to agree with respect to climate perceptions. The present paper demonstrates that Drexler's analysis provided inflated estimates of agreement among individuals. The logic of the approach is then extended to other studies in which inflated estimates of agreement appeared likely. (Author)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.219

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
James, L. R.
Affiliations
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
James, Lawrence R.
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Published
1982-04
Volume
67
Issue
2
Pages
219-229
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
OpenAlex
W1996339572
Cited by
2,139
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 84 · 2022: 94 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 123 · 2019: 93 · 2018: 87 · 2017: 63 · 2016: 90 · 2015: 88 · 2014: 85 · 2013: 89 · 2012: 98
FWCI
7.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
aggregation bias, climate perception, organizational membership

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