China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Looking beyond the impairment
Published in Margaret Walshe, Nick Miller, Clinical Cases in Dysarthria, 2021
The assessments used in this case report not only provided insight into how dysarthria had impacted TS but also served as a point for discussion and an opportunity to provide possible solutions to difficulties. Employing the DIP, CES and semantic differential scale, as well as other similar scales also helped identify situational/interaction variables that can be a useful pointer in any impairment-focused therapy approach. They also allowed impairment-based approaches taught in other therapy episodes to be consolidated into TS’s communication interactions.
A Human Factors and Ergonomics Approach to Understanding the Patient Experience in Emergency Medicine
Published in Rupa S. Valdez, Richard J. Holden, The Patient Factor, 2021
Enid Montague, Melinda Jamil, Jie Xu, Mitesh Rao
One of the earliest articles in HFE literature examining hospital environments’ effects on patients was Ronco (1972). Much like the patient experience literature cited here, the primary data collection method was a survey-based tool, in this case a semantic differential questionnaire gathering patient impressions of hospital rooms. This study did not examine ED environments, but did clearly propose that HFE specialists who research hospital design must not only consider the needs of doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff, but also the needs of patients.
The Evaluation
Published in William C. Beck, Ralph H. Meyer, The Health Care Environment: The User’s Viewpoint, 2019
The semantic differential is most useful when one knows the specific aspect of the physical setting to which the individual is responding. Unfortunately, this is often not the case. Two individuals may have the same numerical score on a scale, but be responding to entirely different aspects of the setting. Unless used in conjunction with other instruments, or as part of a controlled study in which the nature of the stimulus is varied systematically so that any observed differences in scores can be attributed to differences in the stimulus, the semantic differential is primarily helpful in identifying basic problems or areas of excellence. It is useful to know, however, not only whether a room or environmental characteristic is pleasant or unpleasant, but also whether this is a dimension that is important to the individual. Again, such information helps set priorities and future courses of action.
Inoculating Against Disillusionment: Protecting Student Confidence in Universities Before a Campus Shooting Crisis
Published in Journal of School Violence, 2022
Erin B. Hester, Sarah Geegan, Bobi Ivanov
Certainty was assessed using a single item (see, Pfau et al., 2005). Respondents used a continuum ranging from 0 (no certainty) to 100 (absolute certainty), respondents to estimate how certain they were about their beliefs toward the statement. Following prior inoculation research (e.g., Ivanov, Sellnow et al., 2017), certainty was included as a measure of strength because it has consistently predicted attitude or belief stability (e.g., Bassili, 1996). Beliefs toward the statement were indexed using a composite measure of four bipolar adjective items used in recent inoculation studies (e.g., Ivanov et al., 2016). The 7-point semantic differential scale included the following adjective pairs: bad/good, dislike/like, wrong/right, and strongly disagree/strongly agree. The scale demonstrated high reliability for initial beliefs (α = .96) and final beliefs (α = .98).
An exploratory study of student, speech–language pathologist and emergency worker impressions of speakers with dysarthria
Published in International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2021
Kathryn P. Connaghan, Chelsea Wertheim, Jacqueline S. Laures-Gore, Scott Russell, Rupal Patel
Semantic differential scaling is a reliable and valid technique that has been used frequently for attitude research (Llamas & Watt, 2014; Verhagen, Hooff, & Meents, 2015). While all attitude measurement approaches have limitations (Llamas & Watt, 2014), semantic differential scaling has been used for research individuals with communication disorders such as lisping, stuttering, dysphonia, hearing impairment and cochlear implant use and dysarthria (Eadie et al., 2017; Freeman, 2018a; Freeman, 2018b; Ruscello, Lass, Hansen, & Blankenship, 1992). The theoretical basis of this rating method is that one’s attitude can be described in terms of direction and magnitude through the use of bipolar adjective pairs (see Verhagen et al., 2015 for a review of strengths and weaknesses of semantic differential scales).
Stigma research in the field of intellectual disabilities: a scoping review on the perspective of care providers
Published in International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 2021
Hannah A. Pelleboer-Gunnink, Wietske M. W. J. van Oorsouw, Jaap van Weeghel, Petri J. C. M. Embregts
With the exception of three studies, two of which employed semantic differential scales (Harris and Brady 1995, Parchomiuk 2012) and the other a repertory grid technique (Hare et al.2012), all quantitative studies used Likert-scale self-report measures of explicit attitudes. Most measures did not specifically aim to capture stigmatization, but tended to address general attitudes. Although some validated outcome measures were used (e.g. CLAS-ID; SMRAI), most studies used self-developed questionnaires and reported only on Cronbach’s alpha as a measure of internal consistency of the measure, but no other indicators of reliability (e.g. test-retest reliability) were described. Regarding qualitative studies, semi-structured interviews (n = 3), focus groups (n = 2), open-ended questions (n = 1), and observations with additional interviews (n = 1) were used.