Ingham R J, Cordes A K, Finn P
University of California, Santa Barbara.
J Speech Hear Res. 1993 Dec;36(6):1168-76. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3606.1168.
The study reported in this paper was designed to replicate and extend the results of an earlier study (Ingham, Cordes, & Gow, 1993) that investigated time-interval judgments of stuttering. Results confirmed earlier findings that interjudge agreement is higher for these interval-recording tasks than has been previously reported for event-based analyses of stuttering judgments or for time-interval analyses of event judgments. Results also confirmed an earlier finding that judges with intrajudge agreement levels of 90% or better show higher interjudge agreement than judges with lower intrajudge agreement scores. This study failed to find differences between audiovisual and audio-only judgment conditions; between relatively experienced and relatively inexperienced student judges; and, most importantly, between the judgments made, and the agreement levels achieved, by judges from two different clinical research settings. The implications of these findings for attempts to develop a reliable measurement method for stuttering are discussed.
本文所报告的研究旨在重复并扩展一项早期研究（英厄姆、科德斯和高，1993年）的结果，该早期研究调查了口吃的时间间隔判断。结果证实了早期的发现，即对于这些间隔记录任务，评判者之间的一致性比先前对口吃判断的基于事件的分析或事件判断的时间间隔分析所报告的更高。结果还证实了一项早期发现，即评判者内部一致性水平达到90%或更高的评判者比评判者内部一致性得分较低的评判者表现出更高的评判者之间的一致性。本研究未能发现视听判断条件与纯音频判断条件之间的差异；相对有经验和相对缺乏经验的学生评判者之间的差异；以及最重要的是，来自两个不同临床研究环境的评判者所做出的判断以及所达到的一致性水平之间的差异。本文讨论了这些发现对于尝试开发一种可靠的口吃测量方法的意义。
