Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41424609›Full record

ArticleEducational and psychological measurement2025

Reconceptualizing Scoring Reliability Through Linguistic Similarity.

Ji Yoon Jung, Ummugul Bezirhan, Matthias von Davier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Educational and psychological measurement, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ji Yoon JungBoston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5995-219X
Ummugul BezirhanBoston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.
Matthias von DavierBoston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1298-9701

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional cross-country scoring reliability in international large-scale assessments often depends on double scoring, which typically involves relatively small samples of multilingual responses. To extend the reach of reliability estimation, this study introduces the Linguistic-integrated Reliability Audit (LiRA), a novel method that measures scoring reliability using an entire dataset in a large-scale, multilingual context. LiRA automatically generates a second score for each response by analyzing its semantic alignment within a neighborhood of similar responses, then applies a weighted majority voting to determine a consensus score. Results demonstrate that LiRA provides a more comprehensive and systematic estimation of scoring reliability at the item, country, and language levels, while preserving the fundamental concepts of traditional reliability.

Indexed as

cross-country scoring consistencyILSAsscoring reliabilitysemantic similarityweighted majority voting

Identifiers

PMID41424609
PMCPMC12716981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.