小组对话实验的有效设计:来自实例研究的见解。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Raluca Nicoras, Bryony Buck, Rosa-Linde Fischer, Matthew Godfrey, Lauren V Hadley, Karolina Smeds, Graham Naylor
{"title":"小组对话实验的有效设计:来自实例研究的见解。","authors":"Raluca Nicoras, Bryony Buck, Rosa-Linde Fischer, Matthew Godfrey, Lauren V Hadley, Karolina Smeds, Graham Naylor","doi":"10.1044/2025_AJA-24-00226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With current advances in experimental techniques, there is a renewed interest in studying communication behavior, reflecting a desire to improve our understanding of hearing disability and the effects of treatment interventions at the level of in-the-moment behaviors. Group conversations are among the most challenging situations for people with hearing loss. Experiments on group conversations are increasingly common and disproportionately more demanding than dyad studies to design and execute. Thorough design and planning are critical for successfully capturing valid behavioral data, highlighting the value of sharing behind-the-scenes experiences with the researcher community. We have completed a laboratory study of four-way group conversations involving people with and without hearing loss. This article describes the goals and compromises involved in our design choices and evaluates their effectiveness through participant feedback. Aspects covered include contrasts and covariates, group composition and physical arrangement, participant characteristics, hearing devices, participant experience, physical environment, conversational task, and measurement modalities. Next, we briefly describe the experiment's execution. Finally, we analyze and discuss participants' feedback and reflect on what proved effective, what did not, and what design \"worries\" proved founded or unfounded. We hope thereby to provide support and inspiration for others who may be faced with similar design challenges. The main message is that such an experiment can be carried out successfully and in such a way that the behavioral and self-report data collected are likely to carry a relatively high degree of ecological validity while still supporting experimental and statistical control.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effective Design for Experiments on Small-Group Conversation: Insights From an Example Study.\",\"authors\":\"Raluca Nicoras, Bryony Buck, Rosa-Linde Fischer, Matthew Godfrey, Lauren V Hadley, Karolina Smeds, Graham Naylor\",\"doi\":\"10.1044/2025_AJA-24-00226\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>With current advances in experimental techniques, there is a renewed interest in studying communication behavior, reflecting a desire to improve our understanding of hearing disability and the effects of treatment interventions at the level of in-the-moment behaviors. Group conversations are among the most challenging situations for people with hearing loss. Experiments on group conversations are increasingly common and disproportionately more demanding than dyad studies to design and execute. Thorough design and planning are critical for successfully capturing valid behavioral data, highlighting the value of sharing behind-the-scenes experiences with the researcher community. We have completed a laboratory study of four-way group conversations involving people with and without hearing loss. This article describes the goals and compromises involved in our design choices and evaluates their effectiveness through participant feedback. Aspects covered include contrasts and covariates, group composition and physical arrangement, participant characteristics, hearing devices, participant experience, physical environment, conversational task, and measurement modalities. Next, we briefly describe the experiment's execution. Finally, we analyze and discuss participants' feedback and reflect on what proved effective, what did not, and what design \\\"worries\\\" proved founded or unfounded. We hope thereby to provide support and inspiration for others who may be faced with similar design challenges. The main message is that such an experiment can be carried out successfully and in such a way that the behavioral and self-report data collected are likely to carry a relatively high degree of ecological validity while still supporting experimental and statistical control.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Audiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Audiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_AJA-24-00226\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_AJA-24-00226","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着实验技术的进步,人们对交流行为的研究重新产生了兴趣,这反映了人们希望提高我们对听力障碍的理解,以及在即时行为水平上干预治疗的效果。对于听力损失的人来说,小组对话是最具挑战性的情况之一。针对群体对话的实验越来越普遍,在设计和执行方面也比成对实验要求高得多。彻底的设计和规划对于成功捕获有效的行为数据至关重要,突出了与研究人员社区分享幕后经验的价值。我们已经完成了一项实验室研究,涉及有听力损失和没有听力损失的人的四人小组对话。本文描述了我们的设计选择中涉及的目标和妥协,并通过参与者的反馈评估了它们的有效性。涉及的方面包括对比和协变量、群体组成和物理安排、参与者特征、听力设备、参与者经验、物理环境、会话任务和测量方式。接下来,我们简要描述实验的执行过程。最后,我们分析和讨论参与者的反馈,并反思哪些被证明是有效的,哪些没有,以及哪些设计“担忧”被证明是有根据的或没有根据的。我们希望以此为其他可能面临类似设计挑战的人提供支持和灵感。主要的信息是,这样的实验可以成功地进行,并且以这样一种方式,收集的行为和自我报告数据可能具有相对较高的生态有效性,同时仍然支持实验和统计控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effective Design for Experiments on Small-Group Conversation: Insights From an Example Study.

With current advances in experimental techniques, there is a renewed interest in studying communication behavior, reflecting a desire to improve our understanding of hearing disability and the effects of treatment interventions at the level of in-the-moment behaviors. Group conversations are among the most challenging situations for people with hearing loss. Experiments on group conversations are increasingly common and disproportionately more demanding than dyad studies to design and execute. Thorough design and planning are critical for successfully capturing valid behavioral data, highlighting the value of sharing behind-the-scenes experiences with the researcher community. We have completed a laboratory study of four-way group conversations involving people with and without hearing loss. This article describes the goals and compromises involved in our design choices and evaluates their effectiveness through participant feedback. Aspects covered include contrasts and covariates, group composition and physical arrangement, participant characteristics, hearing devices, participant experience, physical environment, conversational task, and measurement modalities. Next, we briefly describe the experiment's execution. Finally, we analyze and discuss participants' feedback and reflect on what proved effective, what did not, and what design "worries" proved founded or unfounded. We hope thereby to provide support and inspiration for others who may be faced with similar design challenges. The main message is that such an experiment can be carried out successfully and in such a way that the behavioral and self-report data collected are likely to carry a relatively high degree of ecological validity while still supporting experimental and statistical control.

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
American Journal of Audiology
American Journal of Audiology AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
163
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Mission: AJA publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to clinical audiology methods and issues, and serves as an outlet for discussion of related professional and educational issues and ideas. The journal is an international outlet for research on clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, management and outcomes of hearing and balance disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. The clinical orientation of the journal allows for the publication of reports on audiology as implemented nationally and internationally, including novel clinical procedures, approaches, and cases. AJA seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of clinical audiology, including audiologic/aural rehabilitation; balance and balance disorders; cultural and linguistic diversity; detection, diagnosis, prevention, habilitation, rehabilitation, and monitoring of hearing loss; hearing aids, cochlear implants, and hearing-assistive technology; hearing disorders; lifespan perspectives on auditory function; speech perception; and tinnitus.
×
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