- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Under the CoP the judges’ protocol sheets contain so much data that it is hard to know how to get started in addressing the question of whether two judges see things pretty much the same way or not.
When judging is not anonymous, there is an easy way it to do it. Convert each judges’ scores to ordinals. Then compute something called the “Spearman rank correlation coefficient.”
Here is how to do it.
..................RUS....…FRA..difference..d squared
Yagudin.........1..........2..........1..........1
Plushenko......2..........3..........1..........1
Goebel..........3..........1..........2..........4
Honda..........4...........4..........0..........0
Total..............................................6
Now compute r = 6 times (sum of the squared differences) divided by nx(n^2-1)
= (6x6)/(4x15) = .6
This is 60% correlation.
When judging is not anonymous, there is an easy way it to do it. Convert each judges’ scores to ordinals. Then compute something called the “Spearman rank correlation coefficient.”
Here is how to do it.
..................RUS....…FRA..difference..d squared
Yagudin.........1..........2..........1..........1
Plushenko......2..........3..........1..........1
Goebel..........3..........1..........2..........4
Honda..........4...........4..........0..........0
Total..............................................6
Now compute r = 6 times (sum of the squared differences) divided by nx(n^2-1)
= (6x6)/(4x15) = .6
This is 60% correlation.
Last edited: