On the empirical identification and evaluation of “expert nominators”

The current study aims to evaluate and empirically investigate Prinstein’s (2007) conclusions regarding “expert nominators,” a subsample of individuals in a peer group whose peer nominations might substitute for nominations from the full sample. The current study empirically identified experts based...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational journal of behavioral development Vol. 39; no. 2; pp. 186 - 193
Main Authors Marks, Peter E. L., Babcock, Ben, Cillessen, Antonius H. N.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London, England SAGE Publications 01.03.2015
Subjects
Accuracy
Expertise
Feasibility Studies
Grade 8
Identification
Middle School Students
Peer Relationship
Reliability
United States (Northeast)
Validity
sociometry
peer nominations
sociometric methods
expert nominators
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The current study aims to evaluate and empirically investigate Prinstein’s (2007) conclusions regarding “expert nominators,” a subsample of individuals in a peer group whose peer nominations might substitute for nominations from the full sample. The current study empirically identified experts based on comparative accuracy, the extent to which each participant’s nominations matched full sample nominations across items. Eighth-graders at two schools (Ns = 273 and 334) completed 16 nomination items. Participants were labeled “experts” if they showed above-average comparative accuracy on at least 75% of items; however, expert nominations were neither highly internally reliable nor valid. Nominations from experts would not have adequately substituted for collecting full-sample nominations. Future research may possibly benefit from identifying more limited, single-item experts.
ISSN:0165-0254
1464-0651
DOI:10.1177/0165025414556518