An evaluation of multiple-choice test images for comprehension assessment in aphasia
An evaluation of multiple-choice test images for comprehension assessment in aphasia
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/02687030600695194
复制
发表时间：
2007-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Hallowell, Brooke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Heuer, Sabine;Hallowell, Brooke
背景：在失语症患者的理解测试中，使用图像的多项选择是很常见的。一般认为，被评估的人感知在这些任务中表示的图像的内容。然而，个体图像的特定视觉特性可能影响视觉注意力，这可能影响选择与言语刺激相对应的正确目标图像的准确性。测试反应的有效性可能会混淆（1）物理刺激功能，如大小，和（2）图像所传达的语义内容，如图像familiarity.Aims：第一个目的是开发一个评级工具，以评估视觉刺激属性和语义内容的多项选择图像的传递，基于大量的经验文献回顾和验证专家在平面设计。第二个目的是研究从出版的失语症电池中选择的图像的观众的主观评级之间的关系程度，使用评级工具，和眼动测量记录为独立的观众看着相同的图像。第三个目的是比较每个图像集的不成比例视觉注意力的实际眼动指数与均匀比例视觉注意力的理想值。方法和程序：一种评级工具，基于对文献的广泛审查，并由平面设计和眼动追踪专家进行评估和修订，的开发，以确定在多项选择图像的影响，并通过经验测试的观众的眼球运动模式，因为他们看了从出版的失语症测试的图像进行评估。共有20名成年人从五个失语症电池的20个图像集。眼动记录为一个单独的组40名成年人观看相同的images.Outcomes和结果：评级与眼动反应没有统计学相关性。所有多项选择的图像集提示显着不成比例的visual attention.Conclusions：结果突出的重要性：（1）考虑任何给定的患者的测试性能的视觉刺激混淆的可能影响，和（2）更好地控制图像设计多项选择的测试图像，以提高评估的有效性。需要进一步的研究，以改善主观和客观的手段评估的图像和准则，以改善设计的多选择图像显示。
Background: Using images in multiple-choice formats for comprehension testing in aphasia is common. It is generally assumed that persons being assessed perceive the content of the images represented in such tasks. However, specific visual characteristics of individual images may influence visual attention, which may influence accuracy in the selection of a correct target image corresponding to a verbal stimulus. The validity of test responses may be confounded by (1) physical stimulus features, such as size, and (2) semantic content conveyed by images, such as image familiarity.Aims: The first aim was to develop a rating instrument to assess visual stimulus properties and semantic content conveyance in multiple-choice images, based on an extensive review of empirical literature and validated by experts in graphic design. The second aim was to study the degree of relationship between viewers' subjective ratings of images selected from published aphasia batteries, using the rating instrument, and eye movement measures recorded as independent viewers looked at the same images. The third aim was to compare the viewers' actual eye movement indices of disproportionate visual attention to an ideal value of evenly proportionate visual attention for each image set.Methods & Procedures: A rating instrument, based on an extensive review of literature and assessed and revised by graphic design and eye-tracking experts, was developed to identify such influences within multiple-choice images and was assessed through empirical testing of viewers' eye movement patterns as they looked at images from published aphasia tests. A total of 20 adults rated 20 image sets from five aphasia batteries. Eye movements were recorded for a separate group of 40 adults viewing the same images.Outcomes & Results: Ratings were not statistically correlated with eye movement responses. All multiple-choice image sets prompted significantly disproportionate visual attention.Conclusions: Results highlight the importance of: (1) considering the possible influence of visual stimulus confounds on any given patient's test performance, and (2) better controlled image design for multiple-choice test images to improve the validity of assessment. Further research is needed to improve subjective and objective means of assessment of images and guidelines for improved design of multiple-choice image displays.