No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

A recent development in the field of technical aids for the handicapped is electronic speech synthesis. Whereas this revolutionary advancement may have many benefits for persons whose speech is defective or for those individuals who have lost the use of their natural speech apparatus through physical trauma, a satisfactory analysis of language training models applicable to the instruction of the Phonic Mirror Handivoice model HC 120 had not yet been accomplished. In the present study, two non-vocal cerebral palsied subjects participated throughout a series of three experiments. It was considered important to examine intensively the performances of these selected individuals as they interacted with and learned about the various aspects of a unique form of vocal behavior. In the first experiment, a traditional paired-associates procedure, Method A, was the standard training method with which other methods were compared. Method B was essentially a paired-associates procedure that emphasized the personal histories of verbal behavior for each subject; Method C established discriminative control over vocal responses by natural features of the environment; Method D combined a paired-associates procedure with one in which the subject directly supplied supplementary verbal stimuli as part of the training procedure. The criterion for effectiveness was the number of training/testing cycles required for each S to achieve criterion (of 100% correct) on each word list. The results of these comparisons indicated that none of the three methods was any more or less effective than the traditional paired-associates procedures. Upon the completion of the second comparison (i.e., Method A and Method C), an informal retention survey was conducted. The responses from both subjects to this survey indicated poor retention for test stimuli established on early lists but increasing retention on the more recently trained lists. Experiment 2 was therefore designed to determine the replicability of this retention phenomenon both within and between the two S's, using Method A, across three different word lists. This experiment showed that when test stimuli were presented 24 hours after training, there was little or no loss of control over the appropriate word. An additional finding was that little or no retention was exhibited by either S for words which had not been retested at the 24 hour interval and whose retest intervals were 4, 5, and 6 days. A feature of the Experiment 2 survey was that the variables of time (elapsed from training to testing) and additional training were confounded. Therefore, Experiment 3, again using Method A, was conducted to separately (1)evaluate the effectiveness of a simple retraining procedure on extended retention, and (2)examine the effect of elapsed time on discriminative control over the previously established verbal responses. The results of the retraining procedure were positive. Whereas previous surveys of Experiment 2 had produced little or no evidence of retention beyond the 48 hour interval, 60% of the test stimuli in Experiment 3 discriminated their appropriate verbal responses. In contrast, the word lists which had not undergone retraining at the 24 hour interval nor had been followed by additional training of new word lists exhibited retention of either 0 or 20%. Two major outcomes of the present study were (1)the four training methods were all effective, but not differentially so, in teaching the numeric language of the HandiVoice, and (2)effective retention over a number of days could be achieved by a single retraining session. These findings offer several practical guidelines for future HandiVoice instructors to establish and maintain a new but important form of verbal behavior.

Σε ένα γραμμικό υπόδειγμα βοηθητικών μεταβλητών η ασθενής συσχέτιση των βοηθητικών μεταβλητών με τις ενδογενείς ερμηνευτικές μεταβλητές είναι γνωστή στη βιβλιογραφία ως το ζήτημα των ασθενών βοηθητικών μεταβλητών. Στην παρούσα εργασία διερευνώνται διάφορες πτυχές του εν λόγω ζητήματος και επισημαίνονται πιθανές μέθοδοι για την αντιμετώπισή του. Επίσης, μελετάται η απόδοση των εκτιμητών OLS, TSLS, BTSLS, LIML και Fuller-k κάτω από την υπόθεση των ασθενών βοηθητικών μεταβλητών, μέσω ενός πειράματος Monte Carlo, με τα αποτελέσματα να τεκμηριώνουν τη δυσκολία λήψης αξιόπιστων σημειακών εκτιμήσεων. / Weak instruments arise when the instruments in linear instrumental variables (IV) regression are weakly correlated with the included endogenous variables. We review most of the recent studies on weak instruments and point to several methods that have been proposed to deal with such instruments. Using a Monte Carlo experiment we study the performance of OLS, TSLS, BTSLS, LIML and Fuller-k estimators under weak instruments. Our results indicate the difficulty of obtaining reliable point estimates.

No description available.

Background: Commonly used response scales in patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures include the visual analogue scale, 11-point numeric rating scale, 5-point numeric rating scale, 5-point verbal rating scale, and 5-point verbal-numeric rating scale. Although prior studies have explored the interpretation of response scale labels and compared scores resulting from the response scale, many questions remain. Purpose: To identify sets of verbal descriptors interpreted with the least variation and to explore whether the response scales provide interval level data and whether the scales are interchangeable. Methods: Subject recruitment and screening was through an online drug-drug interaction service (MediGuard.org). Via an online survey platform, subjects used a scale (0 = lowest possible and 10=highest possible) to assign interpretation scores to verbal descriptors. Repeated measures analysis of variance informed the test interval data between scores. Subjects also completed repeated administrations of four symptom-specific item stems with different response scales. Ordinal regression informed the analysis of scores assigned to verbal descriptors, comparison of probabilities of responding in given categories across scales, and prediction of response category on one scale conditional on observed response on another scale. Cut-points informed tests for interval level data. Results: The sample (n=350) comprised 223 females and 127 males with a mean (SD) age of 56.9 (12.1) years. Number of health conditions per subject ranged from 1 to 12 (median = 5). Age, sex, level of education, and number of health conditions were associated with the interpretation of verbal descriptors. Scores assigned to "poor," "fair," "good," "very good," "excellent," "somewhat," "sometimes," and "quite a bit," had the largest variation. The probability of responding in the same categories on the different response scales was significantly different across scales before and after collapsing categories. No scale yielded interval level data. The 11-NRS data tended more towards interval level than the data from other scales. Conclusions: Using different response scales with verbal descriptors in non-randomized studies may introduce bias. Differential item functioning and subgroup analyses should be investigated in the development and use of these response scales. The scales are not interchangeable. Compared with other scales the 11-NRS produced data approaching interval level. Collapsing categories entails significant probabilities of misclassification.

No description available.