对缩略语的热爱:2013-2023年AAI研究中使用的术语和缩略语分析

Freya L. L. Green, Mikaela L. Dahlman, Arielle Lomness, J. Binfet
{"title":"对缩略语的热爱:2013-2023年AAI研究中使用的术语和缩略语分析","authors":"Freya L. L. Green, Mikaela L. Dahlman, Arielle Lomness, J. Binfet","doi":"10.1079/hai.2024.0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n The involvement of animals to assist or facilitate activities, education, or therapy has become increasingly popular. As we recognize animals’ roles in ameliorating well-being and educational outcomes, researchers and programmers are developing a variety of animal-assisted programs. This diversification has seen the adoption of a plethora of terms and acronyms. Many researchers have pointed out this over-abundance of terms and their inconsistent use, arguing that this creates confusion within the field. The aims of this article were threefold: (1) To identify commonly used terms in animal-assisted intervention (AAI) research; (2) to document their use by frequency; and (3) discuss the benefits and obstacles of the abundance of terms and acronyms in the field. A search of peer-reviewed articles published in English from 2013 to 2023 was conducted across four databases: PsycInfo, Education Source, ERIC, and Scopus to collate articles related to human-animal interactions (HAIs). Records were de-duplicated in Covidence and screened at title/abstract level by two independent reviewers for relevance to AAIs. The resulting articles (\n N\n = 1934) were subsequently coded to track terminology. A total of 1414 distinct terms were identified, the majority of which (77.8%,\n n\n = 1100) were used only once between 2013 and 2023. Only 48 terms (3.4%) were used in the literature more than 10 times. Analysis also provided insight into frequently used terms, the most prevalent of which were “animal-assisted therapy” (8.70%, used 376 times), “animal-assisted interventions” (7.45%, used 322 times), and “therapy dog” (5.06%, used 219 times). Trends across 10 years reveal that specific terms have increased (e.g., “animal-assisted intervention”) or decreased (e.g., “hippotherapy”) in popularity but that the average number of terms used per article remains stable. Despite calls from HAI researchers to reduce redundant terms and improve the accuracy and consistency in the language used, there remains a surplus of terms in the field. This holds implications for AAI researchers, programmers, and individuals gaining interest in AAIs.\n","PeriodicalId":507269,"journal":{"name":"Human-Animal Interactions","volume":"18 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"For the love of acronyms: An analysis of terminology and acronyms used in AAI research 2013–2023\",\"authors\":\"Freya L. L. Green, Mikaela L. Dahlman, Arielle Lomness, J. Binfet\",\"doi\":\"10.1079/hai.2024.0024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n The involvement of animals to assist or facilitate activities, education, or therapy has become increasingly popular. As we recognize animals’ roles in ameliorating well-being and educational outcomes, researchers and programmers are developing a variety of animal-assisted programs. This diversification has seen the adoption of a plethora of terms and acronyms. Many researchers have pointed out this over-abundance of terms and their inconsistent use, arguing that this creates confusion within the field. The aims of this article were threefold: (1) To identify commonly used terms in animal-assisted intervention (AAI) research; (2) to document their use by frequency; and (3) discuss the benefits and obstacles of the abundance of terms and acronyms in the field. A search of peer-reviewed articles published in English from 2013 to 2023 was conducted across four databases: PsycInfo, Education Source, ERIC, and Scopus to collate articles related to human-animal interactions (HAIs). Records were de-duplicated in Covidence and screened at title/abstract level by two independent reviewers for relevance to AAIs. The resulting articles (\\n N\\n = 1934) were subsequently coded to track terminology. A total of 1414 distinct terms were identified, the majority of which (77.8%,\\n n\\n = 1100) were used only once between 2013 and 2023. Only 48 terms (3.4%) were used in the literature more than 10 times. Analysis also provided insight into frequently used terms, the most prevalent of which were “animal-assisted therapy” (8.70%, used 376 times), “animal-assisted interventions” (7.45%, used 322 times), and “therapy dog” (5.06%, used 219 times). Trends across 10 years reveal that specific terms have increased (e.g., “animal-assisted intervention”) or decreased (e.g., “hippotherapy”) in popularity but that the average number of terms used per article remains stable. Despite calls from HAI researchers to reduce redundant terms and improve the accuracy and consistency in the language used, there remains a surplus of terms in the field. This holds implications for AAI researchers, programmers, and individuals gaining interest in AAIs.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":507269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human-Animal Interactions\",\"volume\":\"18 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human-Animal Interactions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1079/hai.2024.0024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human-Animal Interactions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1079/hai.2024.0024","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

让动物参与协助或促进活动、教育或治疗已变得越来越流行。随着我们认识到动物在改善福利和教育成果方面的作用,研究人员和程序设计人员正在开发各种动物辅助程序。随着项目的多样化,人们采用了大量的术语和缩略语。许多研究人员都指出了术语过多和使用不统一的问题,认为这在该领域造成了混乱。本文的目的有三:(1)确定动物辅助干预(AAI)研究中的常用术语;(2)记录这些术语的使用频率;(3)讨论该领域术语和缩略语过多的好处和障碍。我们在四个数据库中检索了 2013 年至 2023 年发表的经同行评审的英文文章:PsycInfo、Education Source、ERIC 和 Scopus,以整理与人与动物互动(HAIs)相关的文章。在 Covidence 中对记录进行了去重复处理,并由两名独立审稿人对标题/摘要进行筛选,以确定是否与 AAIs 相关。随后对所得文章(N = 1934)进行编码,以追踪术语。共确定了 1414 个不同的术语,其中大部分(77.8%,n = 1100)在 2013 年至 2023 年期间仅使用过一次。只有 48 个术语(3.4%)在文献中使用超过 10 次。分析还提供了对常用术语的深入了解,其中最普遍的术语是 "动物辅助治疗"(8.70%,使用 376 次)、"动物辅助干预"(7.45%,使用 322 次)和 "治疗犬"(5.06%,使用 219 次)。10 年间的趋势显示,特定术语的流行程度有所上升(如 "动物辅助干预")或下降(如 "嬉马疗法"),但每篇文章的平均术语使用次数保持稳定。尽管 HAI 研究人员呼吁减少冗余术语,提高用语的准确性和一致性,但该领域的术语仍然过剩。这对人工智能研究人员、程序员和对人工智能感兴趣的个人都有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
For the love of acronyms: An analysis of terminology and acronyms used in AAI research 2013–2023
The involvement of animals to assist or facilitate activities, education, or therapy has become increasingly popular. As we recognize animals’ roles in ameliorating well-being and educational outcomes, researchers and programmers are developing a variety of animal-assisted programs. This diversification has seen the adoption of a plethora of terms and acronyms. Many researchers have pointed out this over-abundance of terms and their inconsistent use, arguing that this creates confusion within the field. The aims of this article were threefold: (1) To identify commonly used terms in animal-assisted intervention (AAI) research; (2) to document their use by frequency; and (3) discuss the benefits and obstacles of the abundance of terms and acronyms in the field. A search of peer-reviewed articles published in English from 2013 to 2023 was conducted across four databases: PsycInfo, Education Source, ERIC, and Scopus to collate articles related to human-animal interactions (HAIs). Records were de-duplicated in Covidence and screened at title/abstract level by two independent reviewers for relevance to AAIs. The resulting articles ( N = 1934) were subsequently coded to track terminology. A total of 1414 distinct terms were identified, the majority of which (77.8%, n = 1100) were used only once between 2013 and 2023. Only 48 terms (3.4%) were used in the literature more than 10 times. Analysis also provided insight into frequently used terms, the most prevalent of which were “animal-assisted therapy” (8.70%, used 376 times), “animal-assisted interventions” (7.45%, used 322 times), and “therapy dog” (5.06%, used 219 times). Trends across 10 years reveal that specific terms have increased (e.g., “animal-assisted intervention”) or decreased (e.g., “hippotherapy”) in popularity but that the average number of terms used per article remains stable. Despite calls from HAI researchers to reduce redundant terms and improve the accuracy and consistency in the language used, there remains a surplus of terms in the field. This holds implications for AAI researchers, programmers, and individuals gaining interest in AAIs.
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