ArticleFrontiers in psychology2019
Reliability of Judging in DanceSport.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mapping assessment practices in DanceSport: a Human-In-The-Loop systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Consistency of Judging Under the World Boxing 10-Point Must Scoring System: Single-Judge and Five-Judge Aggregate Reliability Across the 60 kg, 75 kg, and 90+ kg Categories at the 2025 World Boxing Championships.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Revisiting judging reliability in taekwondo freestyle Poomsae: implications for AI-supported evaluation.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Reliability of judging in Olympic breaking at the 2024 Paris games.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- The individuals' awareness and adoption of electronic health records in China: a questionnaire survey of 1,337 individuals.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Multifactor and multidimensional data quality analysis of judge scoring in diving competition.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- The effect of the partnership between DanceSport couples on competitive performance: the mediating role of athlete engagement.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Measuring digital transformation stress at the workplace-Development and validation of the digital transformation stress scale.PloS one · 2023Article
- Development and initial validation of the Partnership Scale-DanceSport Couples.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- What are the kinematic characteristics of the world champion couple in competitive ballroom dance during the waltz's spin movement?Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Article
- Improving reliability and validity in hip-hop dance assessment: Judging standards that elevate the sport and competition.Frontiers in psychology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to assess the reliability and validity of the new judging system in DanceSport.
methodsEighteen judges rated the 12 best placed adult dancing couples competing at an international competition. They marked each couple on all judging criteria on a 10 level scale. Absolute agreement and consistency of judging were calculated for all main judging criteria and sub-criteria.
resultsA mean correlation of overall judging marks was 0.48. Kendall's coefficient of concordance for overall marks (
conclusionThe relatively large differences between judges' marks suggest that judges either disagreed to some extent on the quality of the dancing or used the judging scale in different ways. The biggest concern was standard error of measurement (SEM) which was often larger than the difference between dancers scores suggesting that this judging system lacks validity. This was the first research to assess judging in DanceSport and offers suggestions to potentially improve both its objectivity and validity in the future.
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.