ArticleEducational and psychological measurement2021
Detecting Rater Biases in Sparse Rater-Mediated Assessment Networks.
Article in Educational and psychological measurement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining Differential Rater Functioning and Bias in the Holistic Review of Residency Applications.Journal of graduate medical education · 2026Article
- Human ratings take time: A hierarchical facets model for the joint analysis of ratings and rating times.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- The Effects of Rating Designs on Rater Classification Accuracy and Rater Measurement Precision in Large-Scale Mixed-Format Assessments.Applied psychological measurement · 2023Article
- Detecting Differential Rater Functioning in Severity and Centrality: The Dual DRF Facets Model.Educational and psychological measurement · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Practical constraints in rater-mediated assessments limit the availability of complete data. Instead, most scoring procedures include one or two ratings for each performance, with overlapping performances across raters or linking sets of multiple-choice items to facilitate model estimation. These incomplete scoring designs present challenges for detecting rater biases, or differential rater functioning (DRF). The purpose of this study is to illustrate and explore the sensitivity of DRF indices in realistic sparse rating designs that have been documented in the literature that include different types and levels of connectivity among raters and students. The results indicated that it is possible to detect DRF in sparse rating designs, but the sensitivity of DRF indices varies across designs. We consider the implications of our findings for practice related to monitoring raters in performance assessments.
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.