The traditional procedure for obtaining judges' ratings to ascertain if treatment-related
change has occurred involves the randomization of the materials to be rated and the
separation of pretest from posttest materials. An alternative approach (linked judgments)
is offered as a potential solution to certain instrumentation-related threats to statistical
conclusion validity of the incumbent rating procedure. Data are presented which suggest
that linked raters' judgments might provide a more powerful index of treatment
effectiveness than the traditional procedure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Campbell, D.T. and J.C. Stanley (1963) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally .
2.
Cook, T.D. and D.T. Campbell (1979) Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally.
3.
Cronbach, L.J. and L. Furby (1970) "How we should measure 'change'—or should we?" Psych. Bull.74: 68-80.
4.
Eisler, R., P. Miller, and M. Hersen (1973) "Components of assertive behavior." J. of Clinical Psychology29: 295-299.
5.
Gay, M., J.G. Hollandsworth, and J.P. Galassi (1975) "An assertiveness inventory for adults." J. of Counseling Psychology4: 340-344.
6.
Rathus, S. (1973) "Investigation of assertive behavior through videotape-mediated assertive models and directed practice." Behavior Research and Therapy11: 57-65.
