On the empirical identification and evaluation of “expert nominators”

Abstract

The current study aims to evaluate and empirically investigate Prinstein’s (2007) conclusions regarding “expert nominators,” a subsample of individuals in a peer group whose peer nominations might substitute for nominations from the full sample. The current study empirically identified experts based on comparative accuracy, the extent to which each participant’s nominations matched full sample nominations across items. Eighth-graders at two schools ( Ns = 273 and 334) completed 16 nomination items. Participants were labeled “experts” if they showed above-average comparative accuracy on at least 75% of items; however, expert nominations were neither highly internally reliable nor valid. Nominations from experts would not have adequately substituted for collecting full-sample nominations. Future research may possibly benefit from identifying more limited, single-item experts.