ASSESSING OBSERVER ACCURACY IN CONTINUOUS RECORDING OF RATE AND DURATION: THREE ALGORITHMS COMPARED

  • Mudford O
  • Martin N
  • Hui J
  • et al.
66Citations
Citations of this article
55Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The three algorithms most frequently selected by behavior‐analytic researchers to compute interobserver agreement with continuous recording were used to assess the accuracy of data recorded from video samples on handheld computers by 12 observers. Rate and duration of responding were recorded for three samples each. Data files were compared with criterion records to determine observer accuracy. Block‐by‐block and exact agreement algorithms were susceptible to inflated agreement and accuracy estimates at lower rates and durations. The exact agreement method appeared to be overly stringent for recording responding at higher rates (23.5 responses per minute) and for higher relative duration (72% of session). Time‐window analysis appeared to inflate accuracy assessment at relatively high but not at low response rate and duration (4.8 responses per minute and 8% of session, respectively).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mudford, O. C., Martin, N. T., Hui, J. K. Y., & Taylor, S. A. (2009). ASSESSING OBSERVER ACCURACY IN CONTINUOUS RECORDING OF RATE AND DURATION: THREE ALGORITHMS COMPARED. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42(3), 527–539. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2009.42-527

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free