听者复杂程度对呼吸听力学的影响。

K S Jones, F N Martin
{"title":"听者复杂程度对呼吸听力学的影响。","authors":"K S Jones,&nbsp;F N Martin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Thirty normal-hearing college-age adults were tested by standard and respiration audiometry (RA) at 1000 Hz to investigate the effects of subject knowledge of the RA procedure. Three levels of sophistication were employed: (1) no knowledge, (2) full knowledge, and (3) deception. No significant effects on RA thresholds were revealed as a function of subject knowledge. RA itself was found to be less satisfactory as a means of measuring auditory threshold because of the difficulty in obtaining responses from some subjects and the degree of subjectivity required to judge responses.</p>","PeriodicalId":76026,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Audiology Society","volume":"3 1","pages":"10-3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1977-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of listener sophistication on respiration audiometry.\",\"authors\":\"K S Jones,&nbsp;F N Martin\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Thirty normal-hearing college-age adults were tested by standard and respiration audiometry (RA) at 1000 Hz to investigate the effects of subject knowledge of the RA procedure. Three levels of sophistication were employed: (1) no knowledge, (2) full knowledge, and (3) deception. No significant effects on RA thresholds were revealed as a function of subject knowledge. RA itself was found to be less satisfactory as a means of measuring auditory threshold because of the difficulty in obtaining responses from some subjects and the degree of subjectivity required to judge responses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Audiology Society\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"10-3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1977-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Audiology Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Audiology Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究对30名听力正常的大学年龄成人进行了1000 Hz的标准和呼吸测听(RA)测试,以调查受试者对RA程序的了解的影响。他们采用了三种复杂程度:(1)不知情,(2)完全知情,(3)欺骗。受试者知识对RA阈值没有显著影响。RA本身作为一种测量听觉阈值的手段并不令人满意,因为很难从一些受试者那里获得反应,而且判断反应需要主观性的程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of listener sophistication on respiration audiometry.

Thirty normal-hearing college-age adults were tested by standard and respiration audiometry (RA) at 1000 Hz to investigate the effects of subject knowledge of the RA procedure. Three levels of sophistication were employed: (1) no knowledge, (2) full knowledge, and (3) deception. No significant effects on RA thresholds were revealed as a function of subject knowledge. RA itself was found to be less satisfactory as a means of measuring auditory threshold because of the difficulty in obtaining responses from some subjects and the degree of subjectivity required to judge responses.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信