We draw attention here to the potential bias of interrater influence
in holocultural research. We suggest a procedure for assessing quantitatively the significance of interrater influence in various types of
research-especially holocultural research-where two independent raters code behavioral data.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bales, Robert F.1950Interaction Process AnalysisCambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
2.
French, John R. P., Jr. and Bertram Raven1960The Bases of Social Power In Group Dynamics. Dorwin Cartwright and Alvin Zander, eds. pp. 607-623. Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson.
3.
Glucksberg, Samuel and Roger M. Krause1967What Do People Say after They Have Learned how to Talk?Merrill-Palmer Quarterly13: 309-316.
4.
Homans, George C.1974Social Behavior: Its Elementary FormsNew York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
5.
Murdock, George P. and Douglas R. White1969Standard Cross-Cultural SampleEthnology8: 329-369.
6.
Rohner, Ronald P.1979The People of Gilford: A Contemporary Kwakiutl Village. HRAFlex BooksNew Haven: Human Relations Area Files. (Originally published 1967, by the National Museum of Canada.)
7.
Rohner, Ronald P. and Evelyn C. Rohner1981Parental Acceptance-Rejection and Parental Control: Cross-Cultural CodesEthnology20: 245-260.
8.
n.d. Enculturative Continuity and the Importance of Caretakers: Cross Cultural Codes Behavior Science Research, in press.
9.
Rohner, Ronald P., Raoul Naroll, Herbert Barry III, William T. Divale, Edwin E. Erickson, James M. Schaefer and Richard G. Sipes1978Guidelines for Holocultural ResearchCurrent Anthropology19: 128-129.
10.
Sherif, Muzafer, B.J. White and O.J. Harvey1955Status in Experimentally Produced GroupsAmerican Journal of Sociology60: 370-379.
11.
Siegel, Sidney1956Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral SciencesNew York: McGraw-Hill.
