The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of Consensus, Consistency, and Measurement Approaches to Estimating Interrater Reliability
Open accessOverview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
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
Harman, H. H. (1960) · Cited by 5,148
Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory
Crocker, L. M., & Algina, J. J. (1986) · Cited by 5,090
An overview of content analysis
Stemler, S. (2020) · ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/z6fm-2e34 · Cited by 2,813
Self-citationBest Test Design. Rasch Measurement.
Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,976
Generalizability theory: a primer
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-4192 · Cited by 1,298
Educational and Psychological Measurement and Evaluation
Hopkins, K. D., Stanley, J. C., & Hopkins, B. R. (1972) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 565
Linacre, J. M. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 528
Scoring Rubric Development: Validity and Reliability
Moskal, B., & Leydens, J. A. (2020) · Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/q7rm-gg74 · Cited by 501
Cited by
Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic
McHugh, M. L. (2012) · Biochemia Medica · doi:10.11613/bm.2012.031 · Cited by 19,877
Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007) · Research in Nursing & Health · doi:10.1002/nur.20199 · Cited by 5,273
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
Bai, S., Hew, K. F., & Huang, B. (2020) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100322 · Cited by 994
Learning a Metric for Code Readability
Buse, R. P. L., & Weimer, W. R. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2009.70 · Cited by 396
Metadata
- Authors
- Stemler, S. E.
- Venue
- Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst)
- Publisher
- University of Massachusetts Amherst
- Published
- 2020-03-09
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 4
- OpenAlex
- W2989567029
- Cited by
- 992
- References
- 15
- FWCI
- 40.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: A Comparison of Consensus, Consistency, and Measurement Approaches to Estimating Interrater Reliability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7275/96jp-xz07
- The paper
- Stemler, S. E. (2020). A Comparison of Consensus, Consistency, and Measurement Approaches to Estimating Interrater Reliability. Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst). https://doi.org/10.7275/96jp-xz07
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.
