The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reliability of Nominal Data Based on Qualitative Judgments
Abstract
Most research related to the reliability and validity of marketing measures has focused on multi-item quantitative scales. In contrast, little attention has been given to the quality of nominal scale data developed from qualitative judgments. Judgment-based (“coded”) nominal scale data are important and frequently used in marketing research-for example, in analysis of consumer responses to open-ended survey questions, in cognitive response research, in meta-analysis, and in content analysis. The authors address opportunities and challenges involved in evaluating and improving the quality of judgment-based nominal scale data, with specific emphasis on the use of multiple judges. They review approaches commonly used in other disciplines, then develop a new index of reliability that is more appropriate for the type of interjudge data typically found in marketing studies. Data from a cognitive response experiment are used to illustrate the new index and compare it with other common measures. The authors conclude with suggestions on how to improve the design of studies that rely on judgment-coded data.
Overview
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
“When the described coding procedures were applied, the intercoder reliability according to Perreault and Leigh (1989) was .93, which exceeded the required threshold of .8.”
From A Meta-Analysis of Organizational Complaint Handling and Customer Responses (2011) · cites this paper as Perreault and Leigh (1989)
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales
Cohen, J. (1960) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316446002000104 · Cited by 42,398
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit
Cohen, J. (1968) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0026256 · Cited by 8,736
Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters.
Fleiss, J. L. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031619 · Cited by 8,733
Reliability of Content Analysis: The Case of Nominal Scale Coding
Scott, W. A. (1955) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/266577 · Cited by 1,853
Coefficient Kappa: Some Uses, Misuses, and Alternatives
Brennan, R. L., & Prediger, D. J. (1981) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316448104100307 · Cited by 1,676
Reliability: A Review of Psychometric Basics and Recent Marketing Practices
Peter, J. P. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150868 · Cited by 1,577
Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa.
Fleiss, J. L., Cohen, J., & Everitt, B. S. (1969) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0028106 · Cited by 1,536
Bettman, J. R., & Park, C. W. (1980) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/208812 · Cited by 1,344
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,002 of 1,002
Dark Patterns in Data-Consent Disclosures and Consumer Reactance to Online Behavioral Advertising
Ju, I., Ham, C.-D., & Yel, E. (2026) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2025.2593666 · Cited by 5
“Discrepancies were resolved through discussion, resulting in high intercoder reliability (Perreault and Leigh’s Ir ¼ .98) (Perreault and Leigh 1989).”
van Oest, R., & Girard, J. M. (2021) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000412 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Perreault, W. D., & Leigh, L. E.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Birmingham–Southern College (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1989-05
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 135
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2069585723
- Cited by
- 1,575
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 89 · 2014: 77 · 2013: 88 · 2012: 86
- FWCI
- 12.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Marketing Research (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 › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Keywords
- reliability statistics, nominal data, qualitative judgment, marketing activities, measurement validity
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
