Threads

Reliability and validity data for the Subject-Object Interview

7 tweets · July 2017 · 0 likes · 0 retweets · read on Twitter

Replying to David Chapman @Meaningness ·

@garybasin @alexeyguzey @Malcolm_Ocean it has to be considered tentative/preliminary/speculative as science. The Kohlberg stuff looks pretty solid however, and is closely related

@Meaningness @garybasin @alexeyguzey I think the studies quoted in Guide to the Subject Object Interview conclude good inter-rater and test-retest reliability. Will grab tmro!

@Meaningness @garybasin @alexeyguzey First four photos on inter-rater reliability (one to come)

@Meaningness @garybasin @alexeyguzey Final photo on inter-rater reliability.

@Meaningness @garybasin @alexeyguzey Test-retest reliability.

@Meaningness @garybasin @alexeyguzey Inter-item consistency. (ie consistency given essentially different topics etc interviewed about)

@Meaningness @garybasin @alexeyguzey Validity. Final paragraphs note an in-progress longitudinal study, which should have much more progress by now. Curious about its status...

@Meaningness @garybasin @alexeyguzey Alexey also asked for "(2) predictive power over something interesting?" I don't know any stats, but I haven't looked. Anyone else?