Assessing Interclass Correlation in a Completely Random One Way Design

  • Thread starter Thread starter _joey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Correlation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on assessing interclass correlation (ICC) in a completely random one-way design involving 18 subjects rated by 6 judges. The reliability of the ratings is evaluated using the ICC(1,1) or ICC(1) model. A question arises regarding the necessity of having 6 judges when there are 10 available timeslots for the subjects. Participants express confusion about the relevance of the timeslots and the specific requirements for variance or selection probability. The conversation highlights the complexity of interpreting the question and the need for clarification on the role of timeslots in the rating process.
_joey
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
We have 18 subjects chosen at random, and they are rated by 6 randomly selected raters, and there is no requirement that the same rater rate all the subjects, we have a completely random one way design. Reliability is assessed with a ICC(1,1) or ICC(1) model depending on convention.
The table looks like this

A B C D E F (judges)
1
2
3
.
18
(subjects)

Each judge rates 3 different subject out 18 only.

A question: if there were 10 timeslots available for the subjects was it really necessary to have 6 judges?

I am not sure what the question aks. In particular the part about the timeslots. Is the question asking to rate the subjects in repeated measures?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey _joey.

I'm also not sure what you are asking. Are you trying to either guarantee some variance requirement or some requirement that each subject gets selected with some minimum probability?
 
The question asks to assess the agreement between various pairs of raters rating subjects (let's say examination papers) and then it talks about 10 timeslots for this exam papers. No idea at all about the timeslot. There is probably some trick to it.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top