ArticleJournal of applied behavior analysis2012
Influences of response rate and distribution on the calculation of interobserver reliability scores.
Article in Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Feasibility of Methods of Live Data Collection for Sociability Assessments.Behavior analysis in practice · 2026Article
- Functional Analysis and Treatment of Repetitive Verbal Behavior in Children Diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder.The Analysis of verbal behavior · 2025Article
- Assessing the Utility of a Quality-of-Care Assessment Tool Used in Assessing Comprehensive Care Services Provided by Community Health Workers in South Africa.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We examined the effects of several variations in response rate on the calculation of total, interval, exact-agreement, and proportional reliability indices. Trained observers recorded computer-generated data that appeared on a computer screen. In Study 1, target responses occurred at low, moderate, and high rates during separate sessions so that reliability results based on the four calculations could be compared across a range of values. Total reliability was uniformly high, interval reliability was spuriously high for high-rate responding, proportional reliability was somewhat lower for high-rate responding, and exact-agreement reliability was the lowest of the measures, especially for high-rate responding. In Study 2, we examined the separate effects of response rate per se, bursting, and end-of-interval responding. Response rate and bursting had little effect on reliability scores; however, the distribution of some responses at the end of intervals decreased interval reliability somewhat, proportional reliability noticeably, and exact-agreement reliability markedly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.