Assessing Interclass Correlation in a Completely Random One Way Design

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter _joey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Correlation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around assessing interclass correlation (ICC) in a completely random one-way design involving 18 subjects rated by 6 judges. Participants are trying to clarify the implications of having 10 timeslots for the subjects and how this relates to the reliability of the ratings.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a study design where 18 subjects are rated by 6 judges, with each judge rating 3 different subjects.
  • Another participant questions the necessity of having 6 judges given the availability of 10 timeslots for the subjects.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the original question, particularly regarding the relevance of the timeslots and whether they imply a need for repeated measures.
  • A later reply mentions that the question is about assessing agreement between pairs of raters and notes confusion about the timeslot aspect, suggesting there may be a trick involved.
  • One participant requests clarification on a specific part of the question related to the dataset and the ratings.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express uncertainty about the original question and the role of timeslots, indicating that multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the design and its implications for reliability assessment.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the necessity of the number of judges and the implications of the timeslots on the study design. The participants have not reached a consensus on these points.

_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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
6K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 97 ·
4
Replies
97
Views
8K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
13K
Replies
5
Views
2K