Suppr超能文献

动觉后效与增强/减弱:两阶段程序,因此识别受刺激控制的受试者是禁忌的。

Kinesthetic aftereffect and augmenting/reducing: a two-session procedure, and hence identification of stimulus-governed subjects, is contraindicated.

作者信息

Baker A H

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Queens College, City University of New York, Flushing 11367.

出版信息

J Psychol. 1988 Jul;122(4):349-63. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1988.9915522.

Abstract

A few of the recent researchers of kinesthetic aftereffect (KAE) as an index of augmenting/reducing have continued to employ a two-session procedure. Findings that have accrued in the past decade indicate (a) The first administration of KAE is a reliable (internally consistent) and valid index of augmenting-reducing; (b) there are carry-over effects from the first to the second administration that bias the second session's preinduction scores; (c) KAE scores from sessions after the first do not relate to first-session scores (low retest reliability) and do not measure augmenting/reducing; and (d) unless special procedures are undertaken to avoid using the biased second- (or later-) session preinduction scores, a KAE procedure involving more than one session is contraindicated. When we reached a similar conclusion earlier (Baker et al., 1974), Petrie (1974) disagreed, arguing that a two-session procedure was needed to identify and eliminate an atypical subgroup, the "stimulus governed." The case for determining which subjects are stimulus-governed is assessed and found wanting. Except in special circumstances, a one-session KAE procedure, in which all preinduction trials precede the first exposure to aftereffect induction, is indicated.

摘要

最近一些将动觉后效(KAE)作为增强/减弱指标的研究者继续采用两阶段程序。过去十年积累的研究结果表明:(a)首次施用KAE是增强/减弱的可靠(内部一致)且有效的指标;(b)从第一次到第二次施用存在遗留效应,使第二阶段的诱导前分数产生偏差;(c)第一次之后各阶段的KAE分数与第一阶段分数无关(重测信度低),且无法测量增强/减弱;(d)除非采取特殊程序以避免使用有偏差的第二(或后续)阶段诱导前分数,否则禁忌采用涉及多个阶段的KAE程序。当我们 earlier(Baker等人,1974年)得出类似结论时,Petrie(1974年)表示反对,认为需要两阶段程序来识别和消除一个非典型亚组,即“受刺激支配者”。对确定哪些受试者是受刺激支配者的理由进行了评估,发现并不充分。除特殊情况外,建议采用单阶段KAE程序,即所有诱导前试验都在首次接触后效诱导之前进行。

相似文献

10
Test of the validity of the Vando R-A Scale.万多R - A量表的效度测试。
Percept Mot Skills. 1986 Apr;62(2):379-84. doi: 10.2466/pms.1986.62.2.379.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验