Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click Here for More Information

Click here for free access to the SAGE eReference platform!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yeaton, W. H.
Right arrow Articles by Wortman, P. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Yeaton, W. H.
Right arrow Articles by Wortman, P. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 17, No. 3, 292-309 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9301700303

Reviews

On the Reliability of Meta-Analytic Reviews

The Role of Intercoder Agreement

William H. Yeaton

University of Michigan

Paul M. Wortman

State University of New York

The article addresses the issue of intercoder reliability in meta-analyses. The current practice of reporting a single, mean intercoder agreement score in meta-analytic research leads to systematic bias and overestimates the true reliability. An alternative approach is recommended in which average intercoder agreement scores or other reliability statistics are calculated within clusters of coded variables. These clusters form a hierarchy in which the correctness of coding decisions at a given level of the hierarchy is contingent on decisions made at higher levels. Two separate studies of intercoder agreement in meta-analysis are presented to assess the validity of the model.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
B. Snook, J. Eastwood, P. Gendreau, C. Goggin, and R. M. Cullen
Taking Stock of Criminal Profiling: A Narrative Review and Meta-Analysis
Criminal Justice and Behavior, April 1, 2007; 34(4): 437 - 453.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
S. A. French and P. Gendreau
Reducing Prison Misconducts: What Works!
Criminal Justice and Behavior, April 1, 2006; 33(2): 185 - 218.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Crime DelinquencyHome page
W. N. Welsh and G. Zajac
A Census of Prison-Based Drug Treatment Programs: Implications for Programming, Policy, and Evaluation
Crime Delinquency, January 1, 2004; 50(1): 108 - 133.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Eval Health ProfHome page
W. H. Yeation, J. C. Langenbrunner, J. M. Smyth, and P. M. Wortman
Exploratory Research Synthesis: Methodological Considerations for Addressing Limitations in Data Quality
Eval Health Prof, September 1, 1995; 18(3): 283 - 303.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Eval RevHome page
N. A. Day, D. R. Dunt, and S. Day
Maximizing Response to Surveys in Health Program Evaluation At Minimum Cost Using Multiple Methods: Mail, Telephone, and Visit
Eval Rev, August 1, 1995; 19(4): 436 - 450.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Eval RevHome page
A. J. Petrosino
Specifying Inclusion Criteria for a Meta-Analysis: Lessons and Illustrations From a Quantitative Synthesis of Crime Reduction Experiments
Eval Rev, June 1, 1995; 19(3): 274 - 293.
[Abstract] [PDF]