On the empirical identification and evaluation of "expert nominators''
SourceInternational Journal of Behavioral Development, 39, 2, (2015), pp. 186-193
Article / Letter to editor
Display more detailsDisplay less details
SW OZ BSI ON
International Journal of Behavioral Development
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.
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.