Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5351/CKSS.2009.16.5.753

Measure of Agreement H in mXm Contingency Table  

Kim, Jin-Gon (Department of Biostatistics, The Catholic University of Korea)
Park, Mi-Hee (Department of Biostatistics, The Catholic University of Korea)
Park, Yong-Gyu (Department of Biostatistics, The Catholic University of Korea)
Publication Information
Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods / v.16, no.5, 2009 , pp. 753-762 More about this Journal
Abstract
A measure of agreement H in$2{\times}2$ contingency table was proposed by Park and Park (2007) to resolve the two paradoxes of k. In this study, we generalize H to where the number of categories is greater than two and derive its asymptotic large-sample variance. We also explain the relationships between k's paradoxes and marginal distributions. Using some examples of $3{\times}3$ contingency tables, the behaviors of H and other measures of agreement are compared.
Keywords
Measure of agreement H; paradoxes of k; marginal distributions;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Bennet, E. M. and Alpert, R. and Goldstein, A. C. (1954). Communications through limited response questioning, Public Opinion Quarterly, 18, 303-308   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Cicchetti, D. V., Lee, C., Fontana, A. F. and Dowds, B. N. (1978). A computer program for assessing specific category rater agreement for qualitative data, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38, 805-813   DOI
3 Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales, Educational and Psychological Measure-ment, 20, 37-46   DOI
4 Feinstein, A, R. and Cicchetti, D. V. (1990). High agreement but low kappa: 1. The problems of two paradoxes, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 43, 543-549   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Gwet, K. (2001). Handbook of inter-rater reliability. STATAXIS Publishing company, Gaithersburg
6 Holley, J. W. and Guiiford, J. P. (1964). A note on the G index of agreement, Educational and Psycholog-ical Measurement, 24, 749-753   DOI
7 Janson, S. and Vegelius, J. (1979). On generalizations of the G index and the phi coefficient to nominal scales, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14, 255-269   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Scott, W. A. (1955). Reliability of content analysis: The case of nominal scale coding, Public Opinion Quarterly, 19, 321-325   DOI   ScienceOn
9 박미희, 박용규 (2007). COHEN의 합치도의 두 가지 역설을 해결하기 위한 새로운 합치도의 제안, <응용통계연구>, 20, 117-132   과학기술학회마을   DOI