Busch H, Renfordt E
Pharmakopsychiatr Neuropsychopharmakol. 1976 Sep;9(5):235-41. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1094497.
Sections of 150 seconds duration were taken on a random basis out of TV stored interviews of day 0, 10 and 20 of a double-blind antidepressive drug trial. Not identical sections were selected for the isolated audio and video channel and for the combined presentation in such a way that for each of the 20 patients three times three parts were presented for evaluation. It was the two rater's task to rank each patient's tapes in terms of the degree of depression. They were blind regarding the day of recording the interview (day 0, 10 or 20). The best results were reached with the combined presentation of the audio-video-channel while each channel taken seperately rendered less diagnostic information. The raters evaluated the material in two different modifications: a) Video, audio and than audio-video-channel or b) audio, video and audio-video-channel. The first version (a) was evaluated in a better way than the second one with respect to the content of diagnostic information. Furthemore we found that the evaluation of the visual information became less safe if the audio presentation preceded as in version b.
在一项双盲抗抑郁药物试验的第0天、第10天和第20天的电视存储访谈中,随机选取时长为150秒的片段。对于单独的音频和视频通道以及组合呈现,选取的片段并不相同,使得20名患者中的每一位都有三个部分分三次呈现以供评估。两名评分者的任务是根据抑郁程度对每位患者的录像带进行排名。他们对访谈录制日期(第0天、第10天或第20天)不知情。音频 - 视频通道组合呈现时得到的结果最佳,而单独使用每个通道提供的诊断信息较少。评分者以两种不同的方式评估材料:a)视频、音频,然后是音频 - 视频通道;或b)音频、视频,然后是音频 - 视频通道。就诊断信息内容而言,第一个版本(a)的评估效果优于第二个版本。此外,我们发现,如果像版本b那样先进行音频呈现,对视觉信息的评估就会变得不那么可靠。