Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41883012›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology2026

Estimating the reliability of round-robin judgments with social relations confirmatory factor analyses.

Steffen Nestler, Oliver Lüdtke, Alexander Robitzsch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology, 2026. 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.

Steffen NestlerUniversity of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9724-2441
Oliver LüdtkeLeibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Alexander RobitzschLeibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education Kiel, Kiel, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The social relations model (SRM) is commonly used in psychological research to analyse interdependent data from round-robin designs, where all members of a group rate each other. Based on the recently suggested social relations confirmatory factor analysis (SR-CFA), we present general formulas for determining the reliability of composites of round-robin judgments and also derive simpler variants when specific restrictions are applied to the parameters of the SR-CFA model. In the unidimensional case, this results in an omega-type reliability measure, which can be converted into an alpha-type reliability measure through further restrictions. We also discuss how standard errors of the reliability coefficients can be obtained, illustrate the suggested methods using an empirical example, and we examine the suitability of the estimation approach in a small simulation study. Finally, we discuss questions for future methodological research and how the person-level composites are related to other SRM effect estimates proposed in the SRM literature.

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsJudgmentPsychometricsComputer SimulationFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalReproducibility of Resultsconfirmatory factor analysisreliabilitysocial relations modelstructural equation modelling

Identifiers

PMID41883012
PMCPMC13679762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.