CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 515Reliability and Agreement in MeasurementPsychometric Methodologies and TestingDelphi Technique in Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A disagreement about within-group agreement: disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus

Kozlowski, Steve W., Hattrup, Keith·1992·Journal of Applied Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.77.2.161
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

James, Demaree, and Wolf (1984) developed an indes, r WG , for assessing within-group agreement appropriate when only a single target is rated. The assessment of interperceiver agreement in such situations is of particular relevance to the composition model for climate. Schmidt and Hunter (1989) have criticized the conceptual foundation of r WG because it is not consistent with the classical model of reliability. They proposed an alternative approach, the use of the rating standard deviation (SD X ), the standard error of the rating mean (SE M ), and the associated confidence intervals for SE M to index interrater agreement. This comment argues that the critique of r WG dit not clearly distinguish the concepts of interrater consensus (i.e., agreement) and interrater consistency (i.e., reliability)

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-9010.77.2.161

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 515

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kozlowski, S. W., & Hattrup, K.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
ORCID
Kozlowski, Steve W.
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1992-04
Volume
77
Issue
2
Pages
161-167
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
DOI
10.1037/0021-9010.77.2.161
OpenAlex
W2069294908
Cited by
514
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 26
FWCI
12.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
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 › Delphi Technique in Research
Keywords
interobserver agreement, confidence intervals, classical test theory, reliability statistics

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