Reliability of Judging in DanceSport

Frontiers in Psychology 10:454027 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and validity of the new judging system in DanceSport. METHODS: Eighteen judges rated the 12 best placed adult dancing couples competing at an international competition. They marked each couple on all judging criteria on a 10 level scale. Absolute agreement and consistency of judging were calculated for all main judging criteria and sub-criteria. RESULTS: A mean correlation of overall judging marks was 0.48. Kendall’s coefficient of concordance for overall marks (W = 0.58) suggesting relatively low agreement among judges. Slightly lower coefficients were found for the artistic part (Partnering skills (W = 0.45) and Choreography and performance (W = 0.49)) compared to the technical part (Technical qualities (W = 0.56) and Movement to music (W = 0.54)). ICC for overall criteria was low for absolute agreement (ICC(2,3) = 0.62) but higher for consistency (ICC(3,3) = 0.80). CONCLUSION: The relatively large differences between judges’ marks suggest that judges either disagreed to some extent on the quality of the dancing or used the judging scale in different ways. The biggest concern was standard error of measurement (SEM) which was often larger than the difference between dancers scores suggesting that this judging system lacks validity. This was the first research to assess judging in DanceSport and offers suggestions to potentially improve both its objectivity and validity in the future.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,928

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Reliability as a virtue.Robert Audi - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 142 (1):43 - 54.
Judging as a non-voluntary action.Conor McHugh - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 152 (2):245 - 269.
Against transglobal reliabilism.Peter J. Graham - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 169 (3):525-535.
Is there a reliability challenge for logic?Joshua Schechter - 2018 - Philosophical Issues 28 (1):325-347.
What We Do When We Judge.Josefa Toribio - 2011 - Dialectica 65 (3):345-367.
Reliability and Justified Belief.John L. Pollock - 1984 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 14 (1):103 - 114.
Reliability of information on the internet: Some distinctions.Anton Vedder & Robert Wachbroit - 2003 - Ethics and Information Technology 5 (4):211-215.
Reliability in mathematical physics.Michael Liston - 1993 - Philosophy of Science 60 (1):1-21.
How Abstract Objects Strike Us.Michael Liston - 1994 - Dialectica 48 (1):3-27.
Thinking, Willing, and Judging.Paul Formosa - 2009 - Crossroads 4 (1):53-64.
Reliability in Plantinga´s Account of Epistemic Warrant.John C. Wingard Jr - 2002 - Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 6 (2):149-278.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-05-07

Downloads
4 (#1,624,434)

6 months
1 (#1,471,551)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references