Reciprocity as a Source of Bias in Multiple Peer Assessment of Group Work
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 4097892 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Douglas Magin (autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2001 |
| Volume | 26 |
| Fascículo | 1 |
| Páginas | 53-63 |
| Data de publicação | 2001-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Não |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Studies in Higher Education (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0307-5079 • E-ISSN: 1470-174X |
| Editora | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/03075070020030715 |
| OpenAlex | W1968740524 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 25 |
| Referências citadas | 23 |
Concerns about the use of peer ratings for assessment purposes are manifold. The issues which are raised by practitioners and researchers, and findings based on recent studies addressing these issues, are outlined. One of the most persistent criticisms is that peer ratings in group settings are prone to bias, resulting in unfairness of mark outcomes. The bias is seen to arise as a result of friendships and social interactions accompanying group task activities. Support for the belief that the validity and fairness of peer ratings are vitiated by 'relational effects' is found in the literature on small group behaviour and interactionist theory. Empirical studies in these two areas operationalise relational effects in what is termed 'reciprocation' - the tendency for two people who are involved in rating each other to be influenced in their rating behaviour by social interactions between the two. The effect of this on rating outcomes, referred to as 'reciprocity effects', is seen to be a major source of bias. The study reported here analyses a data set of multiple peer ratings which had been used as part of the assessment for a subject in community medicine. The analysis is based on cell-by-cell correlation analysis of reciprocal (rater/ratee) pairs, enabling an estimate of the proportion of the variance in scores accounted for by 'reciprocity effects'. The effect was found to be negligible, accounting for only 1% of the variance. Implications for practitioners and for small group behaviour research are discussed
Reciprocal · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Innovations in Medical Education · Psychology · Social Psychology · Student Assessment and Feedback
Students' interpersonal perspectives on, conceptions of and approaches to learning in online peer assessment
Unfolding collaborative learning assessment literacy
Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives.
Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline
Effective peer assessment processes
Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Perspectives Around the Peer Assessment Process During an Academic Poster Session
The impacts of scaffolding socially shared regulation on teamwork in an online project-based course
From design to reflection
Who is really an excellent university student and how to identify them? A development of a comprehensive framework of excellence in higher education
The Pilar Model as a Measure of Peer Ratings of Collaboration Viability in Small Groups
Condoning Free Loafers
Higher Education Policy on Student Engagement
Re-conceptualizing classroom assessment fairness
Finding an optimal balance between agreement and performance in an online reciprocal peer evaluation system
The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment
Are men and women really different? The effects of gender and training on peer scoring and perceptions of peer assessment
The analysis of the impact of individual weighting factor on individual scores
The road to self-assessment
Inclusive assessment for linguistically diverse learners in higher education
Using the method of normalisation for mapping group marks to individual marks
Peer assessment in the digital age
Peer and self‐assessment in the first year of university
Does widespread collusion undermine the case for using peer-assessment schemes with assessed group work
The effects of gender on group work process and achievement
Parameter Estimation for Peer Grading under Incomplete Design
Blind Marking and Sex Bias in Student Assessment
Group Learning and Group Assessment on Undergraduate Computing Courses in Higher Education in the UK
Detecting Gender Bias in Peer Marking of Students’ Group Process Work
The Strange Case of the Disappearing Sex Bias
Sex Bias in Student Assessment Overlooked
Peer Assessment of Group Projects in Civil Engineering
The assessment of interpersonal skills
A new round robin analysis of variance for social interaction data
Peer assessment revisited
Guilty in whose eyes? University students' perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in academic work and assessment
Peer, self and tutor assessment
| Obras citantes distintas | 24 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 1,25 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2006 - 2025 (20) |
| Velocidade de citação | recent |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 23 |