1988
DOI: 10.1037/0022-0167.35.3.346
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A method for investigating sources of rater bias.

Abstract: Few studies in counseling and psychotherapy have investigated rater bias. The purpose of this study was to outline a method for studying rater bias. We studied three potential sources of rater bias: (a) characteristics of the rater, client, and therapist; (b) the similarity of characteristics between rater and therapist or client; and (c) perceived similarity between rater and therapist or client. We used a new rater-bias measure. The data for the study were ratings on the Collaborative Study Psychotherapy Rat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
45
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, studies of adherence in the Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program, using the CSPRS, have generally failed to obtain acceptable reliabilities within treatment modalities even for whole scales (Hollon et al, 1988). The most likely explanation for this may be the restricted variability within modalities, but Hill, O'Grady, and Price (1988) have offered other possible explanations in terms of rater fatigue, impression formation, and task complexity. Startup and Shapiro (1991) consider this question further in relation to the SPRS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Indeed, studies of adherence in the Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program, using the CSPRS, have generally failed to obtain acceptable reliabilities within treatment modalities even for whole scales (Hollon et al, 1988). The most likely explanation for this may be the restricted variability within modalities, but Hill, O'Grady, and Price (1988) have offered other possible explanations in terms of rater fatigue, impression formation, and task complexity. Startup and Shapiro (1991) consider this question further in relation to the SPRS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…It would be productive to examine both personality features and demographic characteristics because minimal research has been done on the impact of rater characteristics on process ratings, and data on the relative impact of demographic versus personality features on the reliability and validity ratings would be informative. For example, it could be that rater demographic features rarely account for significant variance in ratings (e.g., Hill, O'Grady & Price, 1988), while personality features often affect both reliability and validity.…”
Section: Recommendationsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Based on the recommendations in the literature (e.g., Hill, O'Grady, & Price, 1988;Hoyt, 2002), a multiple regression analysis was used to assess the strength of potential predictors for the variance between raters. To quantify interrater disagreement, we subtracted each rating from the average rating per target per occasion, to derive an unstandardized deviation score.…”
Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%