Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 321

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessing Inter-Rater Reliability for Rating Scales: Resolving some Basic Issues

Cicchetti, Domenic V.·1976·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Summary: This paper extends the recent work of Hall (1974) by presenting the minimal sample sizes and the specific linear agreement weights required for assessing the reliability of rating scales commonly used in neuropsychiatric and other clinico-medicai settings. The weights are shown to vary as a function of (a) whether or not the rating scale contains a point of ‘absence’, and (b) the number of ordinal points on the scale.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.129.5.452

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 321

Metadata

Authors
Cicchetti, D. V.
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
1976-11
Volume
129
Issue
5
Pages
452-456
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2157183234
Cited by
321
References
2
FWCI
11.60
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: Assessing Inter-Rater Reliability for Rating Scales: Resolving some Basic Issues. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1192/bjp.129.5.452
The paper
Cicchetti, D. V. (1976). Assessing Inter-Rater Reliability for Rating Scales: Resolving some Basic Issues. British Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.129.5.452

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.