析取答案选项使交流复杂化——对丹麦EQ-5D (5l)版本的语言分析

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology Pub Date : 2023-02-06 DOI:10.1007/s10742-023-00300-7
Esben Nedenskov Petersen, Birgitte Nørgaard
{"title":"析取答案选项使交流复杂化——对丹麦EQ-5D (5l)版本的语言分析","authors":"Esben Nedenskov Petersen, Birgitte Nørgaard","doi":"10.1007/s10742-023-00300-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: EQ-5D is an internationally acknowledged tool for assessing health-related quality of life. Our aim was to examine how pragmatic dynamics may influence answers to the EQ-5D-5 L in items where the structure of answer options is disjunctive. Methods: We performed a 3-step linguistic analysis building on the seminal work of Grice, including (1) examination of the lexical meanings of the answer options, (2) considerations of how conversational maxims might affect the respondent’s interpretation of compatible answer options under a single item, and (3) analysis of how the questionnaire’s context might counteract the problem of omitted answer options by shifting the meaning of context-sensitive expressions. Results: All items with disjunctive answer options exhibit both compatibilities and omissions. In combination with the disjunctive form of answer options these features of the EQ-5D-5 L complicates the communicative task for respondents relying on conversational norms to identify the most suitable answers to the instrument’s questions. Discussion: In items where answer options have a disjunctive structure, respondents relying on Gricean conversational maxims will have to depend on their individual understanding of fine-grained details concerning the questionnaire’s purpose and may have to weigh how conflicting norms should be balanced. While such dynamics are likely to go undetected in cognitive interviews, linguistic analysis may help to identify them.","PeriodicalId":45600,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disjunctive answer options complicate communication – a linguistic analysis of the danish EQ-5D (5 L) version\",\"authors\":\"Esben Nedenskov Petersen, Birgitte Nørgaard\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10742-023-00300-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: EQ-5D is an internationally acknowledged tool for assessing health-related quality of life. Our aim was to examine how pragmatic dynamics may influence answers to the EQ-5D-5 L in items where the structure of answer options is disjunctive. Methods: We performed a 3-step linguistic analysis building on the seminal work of Grice, including (1) examination of the lexical meanings of the answer options, (2) considerations of how conversational maxims might affect the respondent’s interpretation of compatible answer options under a single item, and (3) analysis of how the questionnaire’s context might counteract the problem of omitted answer options by shifting the meaning of context-sensitive expressions. Results: All items with disjunctive answer options exhibit both compatibilities and omissions. In combination with the disjunctive form of answer options these features of the EQ-5D-5 L complicates the communicative task for respondents relying on conversational norms to identify the most suitable answers to the instrument’s questions. Discussion: In items where answer options have a disjunctive structure, respondents relying on Gricean conversational maxims will have to depend on their individual understanding of fine-grained details concerning the questionnaire’s purpose and may have to weigh how conflicting norms should be balanced. While such dynamics are likely to go undetected in cognitive interviews, linguistic analysis may help to identify them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45600,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-023-00300-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-023-00300-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:EQ-5D是国际公认的评估健康相关生活质量的工具。我们的目的是研究在答案选项结构为析取的项目中,语用动态如何影响eq - 5d - 5l的答案。方法:基于Grice的开创性工作,我们进行了三步语言分析,包括(1)检查答案选项的词汇含义,(2)考虑会话准则如何影响被调查者在单个项目下对兼容答案选项的解释,以及(3)分析问卷的上下文如何通过改变上下文敏感表达的含义来抵消遗漏答案选项的问题。结果:所有具有析取答案选项的项目都表现出兼容性和省略性。结合答案选项的析取形式,eq - 5d - 5l的这些功能使依赖会话规范的应答者的交际任务复杂化,以确定仪器问题的最合适答案。讨论:在答案选项具有析取结构的项目中,依赖格里希式会话准则的受访者将不得不依赖于他们对有关问卷目的的细粒度细节的个人理解,并且可能必须权衡如何平衡相互冲突的规范。虽然这种动态在认知访谈中可能不会被发现,但语言分析可能有助于识别它们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Disjunctive answer options complicate communication – a linguistic analysis of the danish EQ-5D (5 L) version
Introduction: EQ-5D is an internationally acknowledged tool for assessing health-related quality of life. Our aim was to examine how pragmatic dynamics may influence answers to the EQ-5D-5 L in items where the structure of answer options is disjunctive. Methods: We performed a 3-step linguistic analysis building on the seminal work of Grice, including (1) examination of the lexical meanings of the answer options, (2) considerations of how conversational maxims might affect the respondent’s interpretation of compatible answer options under a single item, and (3) analysis of how the questionnaire’s context might counteract the problem of omitted answer options by shifting the meaning of context-sensitive expressions. Results: All items with disjunctive answer options exhibit both compatibilities and omissions. In combination with the disjunctive form of answer options these features of the EQ-5D-5 L complicates the communicative task for respondents relying on conversational norms to identify the most suitable answers to the instrument’s questions. Discussion: In items where answer options have a disjunctive structure, respondents relying on Gricean conversational maxims will have to depend on their individual understanding of fine-grained details concerning the questionnaire’s purpose and may have to weigh how conflicting norms should be balanced. While such dynamics are likely to go undetected in cognitive interviews, linguistic analysis may help to identify them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology
Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The journal reflects the multidisciplinary nature of the field of health services and outcomes research. It addresses the needs of multiple, interlocking communities, including methodologists in statistics, econometrics, social and behavioral sciences; designers and analysts of health policy and health services research projects; and health care providers and policy makers who need to properly understand and evaluate the results of published research. The journal strives to enhance the level of methodologic rigor in health services and outcomes research and contributes to the development of methodologic standards in the field. In pursuing its main objective, the journal also provides a meeting ground for researchers from a number of traditional disciplines and fosters the development of new quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods by statisticians, econometricians, health services researchers, and methodologists in other fields. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology publishes: Research papers on quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods; Case Studies describing applications of quantitative and qualitative methodology in health services and outcomes research; Review Articles synthesizing and popularizing methodologic developments; Tutorials; Articles on computational issues and software reviews; Book reviews; and Notices. Special issues will be devoted to papers presented at important workshops and conferences.
期刊最新文献
Limitations of the Inter-Unit Reliability: A Set of Practical Examples. Home- and community-based care in the new generation of Medicaid administrative data Entropy balancing versus vector-based kernel weighting for causal inference in categorical treatment settings A terminal trend model for longitudinal medical cost data and survival Multimodal mental state analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1