评估连续记录率和持续时间的观察者准确性：三种算法比较。
Assessing observer accuracy in continuous recording of rate and duration: three algorithms compared.
机构信息
Department of Psychology, University of Auckland (Tamaki Campus), PB 92-019, Auckland, New Zealand.
出版信息
J Appl Behav Anal. 2009 Fall;42(3):527-39. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-527.
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).
三种最常被行为分析研究人员选择来计算连续记录的观察者间一致性的算法，被用于评估 12 名观察者使用掌上电脑记录视频样本的准确性。每个样本记录了 3 次反应率和反应持续时间的数据。通过将数据文件与标准记录进行比较，确定了观察者的准确性。块块和精确一致算法在较低的反应率和持续时间下容易产生过高的一致性和准确性估计。在记录较高的反应率（每分钟 23.5 次反应）和较高的相对持续时间（72%的会话）时，精确一致方法似乎过于严格。时间窗口分析似乎在相对较高但不是在较低的反应率和持续时间（每分钟 4.8 次反应和会话的 8%）下夸大了准确性评估。
Zotero 插件