IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v50y2021i2p837-865.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interrater Reliability in Systematic Review Methodology: Exploring Variation in Coder Decision-Making

Author

Listed:
  • Jyoti Belur
  • Lisa Tompson
  • Amy Thornton
  • Miranda Simon

Abstract

A methodologically sound systematic review is characterized by transparency, replicability, and a clear inclusion criterion. However, little attention has been paid to reporting the details of interrater reliability (IRR) when multiple coders are used to make decisions at various points in the screening and data extraction stages of a study. Prior research has mentioned the paucity of information on IRR including number of coders involved, at what stages and how IRR tests were conducted, and how disagreements were resolved. This article examines and reflects on the human factors that affect decision-making in systematic reviews via reporting on three IRR tests, conducted at three different points in the screening process, for two distinct reviews. Results of the two studies are discussed in the context of IRR and intrarater reliability in terms of the accuracy, precision, and reliability of coding behavior of multiple coders. Findings indicated that coding behavior changes both between and within individuals over time, emphasizing the importance of conducting regular and systematic IRR and intrarater reliability tests, especially when multiple coders are involved, to ensure consistency and clarity at the screening and coding stages. Implications for good practice while screening/coding for systematic reviews are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jyoti Belur & Lisa Tompson & Amy Thornton & Miranda Simon, 2021. "Interrater Reliability in Systematic Review Methodology: Exploring Variation in Coder Decision-Making," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 50(2), pages 837-865, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:50:y:2021:i:2:p:837-865
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124118799372
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124118799372
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124118799372?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barbara Å libar & Dijana OreÅ¡ki & Nina BegiÄ ević ReÄ‘ep, 2021. "Importance of the Open Data Assessment: An Insight Into the (Meta) Data Quality Dimensions," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, June.
    2. Katharina Greve & Riccardo De Vita & Seppo Leminen & Mika Westerlund, 2021. "Living Labs: From Niche to Mainstream Innovation Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-25, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:50:y:2021:i:2:p:837-865. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.