A Comparison of Computerized and Paper-Based Language Tests With Adults With Aphasia.
Purpose: This study investigated whether computers are a useful tool in the assessment of people with aphasia (PWA). Computerized and traditionally administered versions of tasks were compared to determine whether (a) the scores were equivalent, (b) the administration was comparable, (c) variables s...
| Publicado en: | American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology Vol. 22; no. 2; pp. 185 - 198 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
May2013
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=104125632&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 104125632 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 10580360 5E7 jtl: American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology issn: 10580360 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: May2013 vid: 22 iid: 2 pid: 42 pub: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association place: Rockville, Maryland artinfo: ui: 104125632 92947948 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/12-0027) NLM23695898 104125632 ppf: 185 ppct: 13 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: A Comparison of Computerized and Paper-Based Language Tests With Adults With Aphasia. aug: au: Newton, Caroline Acres, Kadia Bruce, Carolyn affil: University College London, UK sug: subj: Aphasia Diagnosis Speech and Language Assessment Diagnosis, Computer Assisted Human Questionnaires England Male Female Aged Middle Age Adult Descriptive Statistics Analysis of Variance Pearson's Correlation Coefficient Chi Square Test Language Tests Clinical Assessment Tools Aged: 65+ years Middle Aged: 45-64 years Adult: 19-44 years Male Female ab: Purpose: This study investigated whether computers are a useful tool in the assessment of people with aphasia (PWA). Computerized and traditionally administered versions of tasks were compared to determine whether (a) the scores were equivalent, (b) the administration was comparable, (c) variables such as age affected performance, and (d) the participants' perceptions of the computerized and traditionally administered versions of the tasks were similar. Method: Fifteen PWA were assessed on 2 language tasks- sentence-picture matching and grammaticality judgment-in 3 conditions: computer only, computer with the clinician present, and traditional. The participants also completed questionnaires rating aspects of each condition. Results: Scores from the traditionally administered tasks were highly correlated with those from the computerized tasks, but scores from the computerized tasks were significantly lower. There was no significant difference in the time taken between the conditions. Whereas some individuals felt comfortable with the computer, overall, participants preferred the traditional assessment method or when another person was in the room. No factors were identified that predicted participants' relative performance in the computer condition. Conclusion: The results suggest that PWA can be assessed using computerized versions of tasks, but that caution should be exercised when comparing scores to those collected using traditional methods, including norms. The variation in participants' opinions regarding computerized tasks suggests that this method might be more suitable for some participants than others. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|