Analyses

Weighted kappa

Agreement that treats nearby categories as partial agreement.

Edit on GitHub

When to use it

Use weighted kappa when two raters use ordered categories and a near miss should count more than a complete miss. Linear weights treat each step the same. Quadratic weights punish larger misses more.

Assumptions

Both columns are ordered categories. Tensr sorts the level names alphabetically and then treats that order as the scale, so name levels so alphabetical order is the real order (1, 2, 3, or low, mid, high does not sort as low-mid-high).

Running it in Tensr

Analyze → Scale → Weighted Kappa. In chat: “Weighted kappa for rater A and rater B.”
Weights start at linear. Quadratic is the other choice.

Options

Prop

Type

Reading the output

The same two raters. Linear weights give partial credit for a one-step miss. Categories are numeric, so sort order matches the scale.

rater_a123
11340
212177
31818

Weighted κ (linear) for rater_a vs rater_b, n = 80. Moderate agreement (κ < 0 poor, 0 ≤ κ < 0.2 slight, 0.2 ≤ κ < 0.4 fair, 0.4 ≤ κ < 0.6 moderate, 0.6 ≤ κ < 0.8 substantial, κ ≥ 0.8 almost perfect). Cutoffs: Landis & Koch, 1977. The primary result is significant (p = < .001). This is large enough, in this sample, to treat the comparison this page is about as a real association rather than noise. Metrics: Weighted κ = 0.508; Unweighted κ = 0.396; SE = 0.084; z = 6.044; p-value = < .001.

Reporting (APA 7)

Weighted κ (linear) for rater_a vs rater_b, n = 80. Moderate agreement (κ < 0 poor, 0 ≤ κ < 0.2 slight, 0.2 ≤ κ < 0.4 fair, 0.4 ≤ κ < 0.6 moderate, 0.6 ≤ κ < 0.8 substantial, κ ≥ 0.8 almost perfect). Cutoffs: Landis & Koch, 1977. This result is significant (p = < .001). The effect is moderate, so report its size with the p-value.

Coming from SPSS

Analyze → Scale → Weighted Kappa. SPSS asks for linear or quadratic weights.