Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. Reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. In the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways.

SBAR II: Application of SBAR

SBAR II: Application of SBAR

SBAR is an effective communication tool used by healthcare professionals to communicate patient information accurately. SBAR stands for Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation. For a better understanding, an example is given below.
SBAR Report from a Nurse to a Health Care Provider
S: "Hello, Dr. Smith. This is Jane, RN, from the Med Surg unit. I am calling to tell you about Ms. White in Room 210, who is experiencing increased pain and redness at her incision site. Her recent...

Measures of Intelligence

Measures of Intelligence

Psychologists measure intelligence by using standardized tests that produce a score known as the intelligence quotient or IQ. To understand IQ tests, it's important to recognize the key principles behind their construction: validity, reliability, and standardization.
Validity refers to how well a test measures what it claims to measure. An intelligence test should accurately assess intelligence rather than another characteristic, like anxiety. Criterion validity is one way to evaluate this; it...

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

COVID-19 Death Determination Methods, Minnesota, USA, 2020-2022<sup>1</sup>.

Emerging infectious diseases·2024

Same author

Correction to: An Investigation of Interrater Reliability for the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) in a Nonpatient U.S. Sample.

Journal of personality assessment·2017

Same author

Rapid-Sequence Serial Sexual Homicides.

The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law·2017

Same author

An Investigation of Interrater Reliability for the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) in a Nonpatient U.S. Sample.

Journal of personality assessment·2016

Same author

Addressing Issues in the Development and Use of the Composite International Reference Values as Rorschach Norms for Adults.

Journal of personality assessment·2014

Same author

The medical-psychiatric coordinating physician-led model: team-based treatment for complex patients.

Psychosomatics·2014

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 28, 2026

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Published on: March 14, 2018

Rorschach intercoder reliability for protocol-level comprehensive system variables in an international sample.

Jennifer Sahly¹, Thomas W Shaffer, Philip Erdberg

¹California School of Professional Psychology, Alliant International University, CA, USA.

Journal of Personality Assessment

|October 18, 2011

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

This study assessed the Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS) coding reliability across 489 international protocols. Most variables showed good to excellent intercoder agreement, indicating strong reliability for the CS coding system.

More Related Videos

How to Calculate and Validate Inter-brain Synchronization in a fNIRS Hyperscanning Study

How to Calculate and Validate Inter-brain Synchronization in a fNIRS Hyperscanning Study

Published on: September 8, 2021

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 28, 2026

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Published on: March 14, 2018

How to Calculate and Validate Inter-brain Synchronization in a fNIRS Hyperscanning Study

How to Calculate and Validate Inter-brain Synchronization in a fNIRS Hyperscanning Study

Published on: September 8, 2021

Area of Science:

Psychological assessment
Psychometrics
Personality testing

Background:

The Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS) is a widely used projective test.
Ensuring the reliability of CS coding is crucial for its clinical and research applications.
Previous reliability studies have yielded varied results, necessitating further investigation.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate the intercoder reliability of protocol-level variables within the Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS).
To provide updated reliability data using a large, international sample of Rorschach protocols.
To identify specific CS variables with varying levels of intercoder agreement.

Main Methods:

A large international sample of 489 Rorschach protocols was analyzed.
Protocols were coded using the Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS).
Intercoder agreement was quantified using the Iota coefficient, a chance-corrected statistical measure.

Main Results:

Iota coefficients for CS variables ranged from .31 to 1.00.
A significant majority of variables (116) demonstrated excellent intercoder agreement.
Twenty-five variables showed good agreement, while 4 exhibited fair and 2 poor agreement.

Conclusions:

The Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS) demonstrates strong intercoder reliability for most protocol-level variables.
The findings support the consistent application of the CS in diverse international settings.
Further examination of discrepancies in lower-agreement variables is warranted.