Code and data for manuscript "Group discussions improve reliability and validity of rated categories based on qualitative data from systematic review"

The study trialed a method to assess inter-rater-reliability for data produced during a systematic literature review. The produced data was mainly of qualitative nature. Under the assumption, that group discussions are beneficial to improve rigor in thinking and detect errors and misclassifications, the impact of group discussion was tested for agreement rates before and after discussion in a parallel coding exercise with 5 people and 21 samples from the peer-reviewed literature on conservation science. Results showed a clear positive impact of discussions across all categories, and unintended error or misclassification due to oversight during reading as the main source of disagreements.