Rater Bias in Psychological Research

Hoyt, W. T. (2000). Rater Bias in Psychological Research: When Is It a Problem and What Can We Do About It?. Psychological Methods, 5(1), 64-86.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2000

DOI

10.1037/1082-989x.5.1.64

Link

https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.5.1.64

Cited from

statistics_experimental_design

Cited by

1 citation across 1 artifact.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Correlated-Source Attribution Failure
  • Multi-witness testimony: witnesses who share a source — a briefing, an article, a rumour — provide weaker independent evidence than naive aggregation implies; the joint testimony sounds corroborated while each per-witness contribution is thin. Rater aggregation: raters trained on the same rubric, or who see each other's work, produce correlated scores that overstate inter-rater reliability and leave each rater's marginal contribution unidentifiable.

    This sourceShows that shared rater perspective/halo introduces correlated rater error that inflates apparent agreement and confounds the separation of individual raters' contributions from shared method variance. (Resolves needs-source-853; supports correlated raters overstating reliability and obscuring marginal contributions.)

Verification

This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:fb782be9f338 · see in the full table