Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
Gwet's AC1/Evidence
Method evidence record

Gwet's AC1

Gwet's AC1 is a chance-corrected agreement coefficient introduced by Kilem Gwet in 2008 as a robust alternative to Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa. It targets the kappa paradox — the unsettling result where coders agree on the vast majority of units yet kappa is near zero because one category dominates — by estimating chance agreement in a way that does not collapse when category prevalence is extreme.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

Gwet's AC1 Agreement Coefficient
Taxonomic method record · process-pipeline / communication
  • Gwet, K. L. (2008). Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61(1), 29–48. · DOI 10.1348/000711006X126600
  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. · DOI 10.1177/001316446002000104
  • Scott, W. A. (1955). Reliability of content analysis: The case of nominal scale coding. Public Opinion Quarterly, 19(3), 321–325. · DOI 10.1086/266577
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

See alsoFleiss' Kappamachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyIntercoder Reliabilitymachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Taxonomic bucketKrippendorff's Alphamachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Taxonomic bucketScott's Pimachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

3 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account