It was hypothesized that, when compared to the Angoff method (W. H. Angoff, 1971), the Nedelsky method (L. Nedelsky, 1954) for standard setting had lower intrajudge inconsistency, lower cutscores, and lower cutscores especially for items presenting challenges to the judges. These hypotheses were tested and supported in a sample of 22 graduate students serving as judges to determine average performance level for 9 research methodology items using both methods. The more consistent Nedelsky methods are attributed to judges' focused use of response options as a consistent source of information. A close scrutiny of the plausibility and similarity of test item distractors tests the Nedelsky judges' own item knowledge, which, when challenged, results in a low item difficulty estimate. (Contains 3 tables and 27 references.) (Author/SLD)