Altenberg Evelyn P, Roberts Jenny A
a Department of Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences , Hofstra University , Hempstead , NY , USA.
Clin Linguist Phon. 2016;30(6):433-48. doi: 10.3109/02699206.2016.1139184. Epub 2016 Feb 25.
The AC-IPSyn computerised system for scoring the Index of Productive Syntax (IPSyn) was evaluated. Twenty language samples, ten taken at 30 months and ten of the same children at 42 months, were each scored for the IPSyn by hand and by AC-IPSyn. Point differences and point-to-point reliability were examined at the levels of the total, subscale, and individual structure scores. Points missed and erroneously given at each level were also analysed. The difference in total scores between manual and AC-IPSyn scoring was relatively small; point-to-point agreement was lower than reported elsewhere. Age differences were also found. AC-IPSyn accuracy varied by subscale and structure, with results suggesting that AC-IPSyn be used at this point in conjunction with hand scoring of more error-prone and low frequency structures. The relatively small total point difference masked the lower reliability revealed by other measures, demonstrating the importance of detailed comparisons of manual and machine scoring.
对用于对产出性句法指数（IPSyn）进行评分的AC - IPSyn计算机系统进行了评估。选取了20份语言样本，其中10份是在30个月时采集的，另外10份是同一批儿童在42个月时采集的，每份样本都由人工和AC - IPSyn对IPSyn进行评分。在总分、子量表和个体结构得分层面检查了分数差异和逐点信度。还分析了每个层面遗漏和错误给出的分数。人工评分和AC - IPSyn评分之间的总分差异相对较小；逐点一致性低于其他地方报道的情况。还发现了年龄差异。AC - IPSyn的准确性因子量表和结构而异，结果表明此时AC - IPSyn应与对更容易出错和低频结构的人工评分结合使用。相对较小的总分差异掩盖了其他测量方法所揭示的较低信度，这表明了人工评分和机器评分详细比较的重要性。
