On the empirical identification and evaluation of "expert nominators''
Publication year
2015Source
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39, 2, (2015), pp. 186-193ISSN
Publication type
Article / Letter to editor

Display more detailsDisplay less details
Organization
SW OZ BSI ON
Journal title
International Journal of Behavioral Development
Volume
vol. 39
Issue
iss. 2
Page start
p. 186
Page end
p. 193
Subject
Social DevelopmentAbstract
The current study aims to evaluate and empirically investigate Prinstein's (2007) conclusions regarding expert nominators, a subsample of individuals in a peer group whose peer nominations might substitute for nominations from the full sample. The current study empirically identified experts based on comparative accuracy, the extent to which each participant's nominations matched full sample nominations across items. Eighth-graders at two schools (Ns = 273 and 334) completed 16 nomination items. Participants were labeled experts if they showed above-average comparative accuracy on at least 75% of items; however, expert nominations were neither highly internally reliable nor valid. Nominations from experts would not have adequately substituted for collecting full-sample nominations. Future research may possibly benefit from identifying more limited, single-item experts.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Academic publications [234316]
- Faculty of Social Sciences [29199]
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.