Hausman Nicole L, Javed Noor, Bednar Molly K, Guell Madeleine, Schaller Erin, Nevill Rose E, Kahng SungWoo
Department of Behavioral Psychology, Kennedy Krieger Institute and the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Department of Behavioral Psychology, Kennedy Krieger Institute.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2022 Mar;55(2):357-368. doi: 10.1002/jaba.811. Epub 2021 Jan 22.
Interobserver agreement (IOA) is important for research and practice, and supports the consistency of behavioral data (Kahng et al., 2011). Although general parameters for how much IOA is needed have been suggested (Bailey & Burch, 2018), it is unknown if the total number of sessions with IOA might impact the IOA coefficient. In this study, IOA was reanalyzed using functional analysis data at various cutoffs. Obtained IOA from these analyses was then compared to the original IOA. Overall, results suggested that, at least when using highly trained observers in a structured clinical setting, there were no significant differences in IOA across cutoffs. However, IOA was sensitive to overall rate of responding in the functional analysis. These data are encouraging, particularly for practitioners, because they provide preliminary support that the amount of sessions with IOA may not be as important as the consistency of the data.
观察者间一致性（IOA）对于研究和实践很重要，并支持行为数据的一致性（Kahng等人，2011年）。尽管已经提出了关于需要多少IOA的一般参数（Bailey和Burch，2018年），但尚不清楚进行IOA的总疗程数是否会影响IOA系数。在本研究中，使用不同临界值下的功能分析数据对IOA进行了重新分析。然后将这些分析中获得的IOA与原始IOA进行比较。总体而言，结果表明，至少在结构化临床环境中使用训练有素的观察者时，不同临界值下的IOA没有显著差异。然而，IOA对功能分析中的总体反应率敏感。这些数据令人鼓舞，特别是对从业者而言，因为它们提供了初步支持，即进行IOA的疗程数量可能不如数据的一致性重要。
