Talk:Krippendorff's alpha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The notation in here is extremely awkward and makes the discussion difficult to follow. Would anyone object to a massive re-write? Ken K (talk) 16:19, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Many changes implemented. I believe this is a substantial improvement, as in the previous version, it seems that the same symbols had several different meanings. I also included mathematical expressions where only English had been used previously.

HOWEVER. I lack the knowledge to complete the "Embrace of other statistics section" accurately. This section does need editing; it it still quite unclear. Ken K (talk) 23:33, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are still huge numbers of undefined or ill-defined terms here in this article. By way of example neither nor is defined before it is used. There are many other such cases.

"When four or more coders are involved, o_ck may be fractions"[edit]

The following example disproves this.

Units u: 1 2 3 4 5
Coder A 3 2 1 1 2
Coder B 3 1 2 2 2
Coder C 3 2 1 3 2

The coincidence matrix for this counterexample is:

Values v or v' : 1 2 3 nv
Value 1 1 4
Value 2 4 7
Value 3 3 4
Frequency nv' 4 7 4 15

With two raters no fractions can occur, as the denominator will always be 1. Suggest that the sentence is changed to: "...when three or more coders are involved..." --EelcoVriez (talk) 09:27, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on the computational example[edit]

There is no hint what is. It is not mentioned above and also not in the linked article. I lack the knowledge to complete this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.193.65.129 (talk) 08:58, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Error in Computational Example?[edit]

It's noted that so the author only includes one of the cases in the numerator, but shouldn't each one be multiplied by 2? If that is not correct, why not? StatsJunkie (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:05, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References incomplete[edit]

When trying to find the primary source for the 0.667/0.8 thresholds I noticed the 2004 publication by Krippendorf is not in the references. It seems to refer to "Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.)". Muxarin (talk) 14:33, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]