电子评估总是适合数字原生代吗?青少年基于纸张和平板电脑的赌博评估的主题内比较

IF 0.8 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL
V. Martínez-Loredo, A. González-Roz, E. García-Cueto, Aris Grande-Gosende
{"title":"电子评估总是适合数字原生代吗?青少年基于纸张和平板电脑的赌博评估的主题内比较","authors":"V. Martínez-Loredo, A. González-Roz, E. García-Cueto, Aris Grande-Gosende","doi":"10.21134/rpcna.2021.08.2.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Technological development has enabled the use of sophisticated methods for assessing multiple human behaviors. Despite the advantages of these new technologies, concerns exist regarding their equivalence with paper-based measures in epidemiological and health-related surveys. To date, literature on this topic in relation to adolescents is virtually nonexistent. This study compares respondents’ performance on the same survey using both paper- and electronic tablet-based assessment methods. A final sample of 135 adolescents (mean age 17.30 years, SD = 0.59; 56.3% males) consecutively completed two versions of the same survey on gambling behaviors and two questionnaires: The Gambling Motives Questionnaire (GMQ) and the South Oaks Gambling Screening-Revised for Adolescents (SOGS-RA). An ad-hoc questionnaire assessing participants’ satisfaction levels with each method was also used. The digital survey yielded a lifetime, past year, and past month gambling prevalence of 54.1%, 45.2%, and 27.4%, respectively. Paper-based prevalence rates were 3.7-5.2% lower (all p < .092) and there were discrepancies in gambling activities. Although the reliability of the questionnaires was high in both formats, total scores were consistently higher in the paper-based format. GMQ and SOGS-RA intraclass correlations between versions ranged from .856-.884. Unexpectedly, students preferred the paper-based survey to the e-assessment (51.5% vs. 48.5%) and also enjoyed it more (31.3% vs 26.1%). Paper- and tablet-based surveys yield different, albeit non-statistically significant, estimations of gambling behaviors even when the same participants were surveyed at one time. We recommend that consistency be routinely checked across assessment formats when adapting paper-and-pencil measures to digital formats","PeriodicalId":43399,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Psicologia Clinica con Ninos y Adolescentes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does e-assessment always fit digital natives? A within-subject comparison between paper- and tablet-based gambling assessments in adolescents\",\"authors\":\"V. Martínez-Loredo, A. González-Roz, E. García-Cueto, Aris Grande-Gosende\",\"doi\":\"10.21134/rpcna.2021.08.2.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Technological development has enabled the use of sophisticated methods for assessing multiple human behaviors. Despite the advantages of these new technologies, concerns exist regarding their equivalence with paper-based measures in epidemiological and health-related surveys. To date, literature on this topic in relation to adolescents is virtually nonexistent. This study compares respondents’ performance on the same survey using both paper- and electronic tablet-based assessment methods. A final sample of 135 adolescents (mean age 17.30 years, SD = 0.59; 56.3% males) consecutively completed two versions of the same survey on gambling behaviors and two questionnaires: The Gambling Motives Questionnaire (GMQ) and the South Oaks Gambling Screening-Revised for Adolescents (SOGS-RA). An ad-hoc questionnaire assessing participants’ satisfaction levels with each method was also used. The digital survey yielded a lifetime, past year, and past month gambling prevalence of 54.1%, 45.2%, and 27.4%, respectively. Paper-based prevalence rates were 3.7-5.2% lower (all p < .092) and there were discrepancies in gambling activities. Although the reliability of the questionnaires was high in both formats, total scores were consistently higher in the paper-based format. GMQ and SOGS-RA intraclass correlations between versions ranged from .856-.884. Unexpectedly, students preferred the paper-based survey to the e-assessment (51.5% vs. 48.5%) and also enjoyed it more (31.3% vs 26.1%). Paper- and tablet-based surveys yield different, albeit non-statistically significant, estimations of gambling behaviors even when the same participants were surveyed at one time. We recommend that consistency be routinely checked across assessment formats when adapting paper-and-pencil measures to digital formats\",\"PeriodicalId\":43399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista de Psicologia Clinica con Ninos y Adolescentes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista de Psicologia Clinica con Ninos y Adolescentes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21134/rpcna.2021.08.2.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Psicologia Clinica con Ninos y Adolescentes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21134/rpcna.2021.08.2.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

技术的发展使得使用复杂的方法来评估多种人类行为成为可能。尽管这些新技术具有优势,但人们对它们在流行病学和健康相关调查中与基于纸张的措施是否等同感到关切。迄今为止,关于青少年这一主题的文献几乎不存在。本研究比较了受访者在同一调查中使用纸质和基于电子平板电脑的评估方法的表现。最终样本为135名青少年(平均年龄17.30岁,SD = 0.59;(56.3%男性)连续完成了两个版本的赌博行为调查和两个问卷:赌博动机问卷(GMQ)和南橡树青少年赌博筛查(SOGS-RA)。还使用了一份特别问卷来评估参与者对每种方法的满意度。数字调查结果显示,一生、过去一年和过去一个月的赌博率分别为54.1%、45.2%和27.4%。纸质患病率低3.7-5.2%(均p < 0.092),赌博活动存在差异。尽管两种形式的问卷的可靠性都很高,但纸质形式的总分始终更高。GMQ和SOGS-RA版本之间的类内相关性在0.856 - 0.884之间。出乎意料的是,学生更喜欢纸质调查,而不是电子评估(51.5%比48.5%),而且更喜欢纸质调查(31.3%比26.1%)。基于纸张和平板电脑的调查即使对同一参与者进行一次调查,也会得出不同的赌博行为估计,尽管没有统计学意义。我们建议在将纸笔测量方法应用于数字格式时,定期检查各种评估格式的一致性
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does e-assessment always fit digital natives? A within-subject comparison between paper- and tablet-based gambling assessments in adolescents
Technological development has enabled the use of sophisticated methods for assessing multiple human behaviors. Despite the advantages of these new technologies, concerns exist regarding their equivalence with paper-based measures in epidemiological and health-related surveys. To date, literature on this topic in relation to adolescents is virtually nonexistent. This study compares respondents’ performance on the same survey using both paper- and electronic tablet-based assessment methods. A final sample of 135 adolescents (mean age 17.30 years, SD = 0.59; 56.3% males) consecutively completed two versions of the same survey on gambling behaviors and two questionnaires: The Gambling Motives Questionnaire (GMQ) and the South Oaks Gambling Screening-Revised for Adolescents (SOGS-RA). An ad-hoc questionnaire assessing participants’ satisfaction levels with each method was also used. The digital survey yielded a lifetime, past year, and past month gambling prevalence of 54.1%, 45.2%, and 27.4%, respectively. Paper-based prevalence rates were 3.7-5.2% lower (all p < .092) and there were discrepancies in gambling activities. Although the reliability of the questionnaires was high in both formats, total scores were consistently higher in the paper-based format. GMQ and SOGS-RA intraclass correlations between versions ranged from .856-.884. Unexpectedly, students preferred the paper-based survey to the e-assessment (51.5% vs. 48.5%) and also enjoyed it more (31.3% vs 26.1%). Paper- and tablet-based surveys yield different, albeit non-statistically significant, estimations of gambling behaviors even when the same participants were surveyed at one time. We recommend that consistency be routinely checked across assessment formats when adapting paper-and-pencil measures to digital formats
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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
3.60%
发文量
27
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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