文字难度和视觉重点对儿科神经心理评估报告的影响:家长的视角。

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Clinical Neuropsychologist Pub Date : 2024-06-20 DOI:10.1080/13854046.2024.2366018
Melissa Gerstle, Julia Fleming Beattie, James Peugh, Thea L Quinton, Anne Bradley, Brenna LeJeune, Dean W Beebe
{"title":"文字难度和视觉重点对儿科神经心理评估报告的影响:家长的视角。","authors":"Melissa Gerstle, Julia Fleming Beattie, James Peugh, Thea L Quinton, Anne Bradley, Brenna LeJeune, Dean W Beebe","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2024.2366018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> Despite varying opinions, little research has examined how to best write pediatric neuropsychology reports. <b>Method:</b> This study gathered input from 230 parents on how text difficulty (reading level) and visual emphasis (bullets, underline, italics) affect report readability and utility. We focused on the most-read report section: summary/impressions. Each parent rated the readability and usefulness of a generic summary/impressions section written in four different styles. The four styles crossed text difficulty (high school-vs-collegiate) with use of visual emphasis (absent-vs-present). <b>Results:</b> Parents found versions with easier text to be more clearly written, easier to follow, and easier to find information (<i>p</i><.001). Parents rated those with harder text to be overly detailed, complex, hard to understand, and hard to read (<i>p</i><.001). Visual emphasis made it easier to find key information and the text easier to follow and understand - but primarily for versions that were written in difficult text (interaction <i>p</i>≤.026). After rating all four styles, parents picked their preference. They most often picked versions written in easier text with visual emphasis (<i>p</i><.001). <b>Conclusions:</b> Findings support writing styles that use easier text difficulty and visual emphasis.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of text difficulty and visual emphasis on pediatric neuropsychological evaluation reports: The parent's perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Melissa Gerstle, Julia Fleming Beattie, James Peugh, Thea L Quinton, Anne Bradley, Brenna LeJeune, Dean W Beebe\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2024.2366018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> Despite varying opinions, little research has examined how to best write pediatric neuropsychology reports. <b>Method:</b> This study gathered input from 230 parents on how text difficulty (reading level) and visual emphasis (bullets, underline, italics) affect report readability and utility. We focused on the most-read report section: summary/impressions. Each parent rated the readability and usefulness of a generic summary/impressions section written in four different styles. The four styles crossed text difficulty (high school-vs-collegiate) with use of visual emphasis (absent-vs-present). <b>Results:</b> Parents found versions with easier text to be more clearly written, easier to follow, and easier to find information (<i>p</i><.001). Parents rated those with harder text to be overly detailed, complex, hard to understand, and hard to read (<i>p</i><.001). Visual emphasis made it easier to find key information and the text easier to follow and understand - but primarily for versions that were written in difficult text (interaction <i>p</i>≤.026). After rating all four styles, parents picked their preference. They most often picked versions written in easier text with visual emphasis (<i>p</i><.001). <b>Conclusions:</b> Findings support writing styles that use easier text difficulty and visual emphasis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2366018\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2366018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:尽管众说纷纭,但很少有研究探讨如何更好地撰写儿科神经心理学报告。研究方法:本研究收集了 230 位家长关于文字难度(阅读水平)和视觉强调(子弹、下划线、斜体)如何影响报告可读性和实用性的意见。我们重点研究了报告中阅读次数最多的部分:摘要/印象。每位家长都对用四种不同风格撰写的通用摘要/印象部分的可读性和实用性进行了评分。这四种风格的文字难度(高中-大学)与视觉强调的使用(无-有)相互交叉。结果:家长们认为文字难度较低的版本文字更清晰,更容易理解,也更容易找到信息(ppp≤.026)。在对所有四种文体进行评分后,家长们选出了自己的偏好。他们最常选择的是文字更通俗易懂、有视觉重点的版本(p结论:研究结果支持使用难度较低的文字和视觉强调的写作风格。
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
Impact of text difficulty and visual emphasis on pediatric neuropsychological evaluation reports: The parent's perspective.

Objective: Despite varying opinions, little research has examined how to best write pediatric neuropsychology reports. Method: This study gathered input from 230 parents on how text difficulty (reading level) and visual emphasis (bullets, underline, italics) affect report readability and utility. We focused on the most-read report section: summary/impressions. Each parent rated the readability and usefulness of a generic summary/impressions section written in four different styles. The four styles crossed text difficulty (high school-vs-collegiate) with use of visual emphasis (absent-vs-present). Results: Parents found versions with easier text to be more clearly written, easier to follow, and easier to find information (p<.001). Parents rated those with harder text to be overly detailed, complex, hard to understand, and hard to read (p<.001). Visual emphasis made it easier to find key information and the text easier to follow and understand - but primarily for versions that were written in difficult text (interaction p≤.026). After rating all four styles, parents picked their preference. They most often picked versions written in easier text with visual emphasis (p<.001). Conclusions: Findings support writing styles that use easier text difficulty and visual emphasis.

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
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
期刊最新文献
Development of a Symptom Validity Index for the Beck Anxiety Inventory. Interpreting the direct- and derived-Trail Making Test scores in Argentinian children: regression-based norms, convergent validity, test-retest reliability, and practice effects. Enhanced detection of suboptimal effort in psychoeducational assessments for dyslexia. Neuropsychological normative standards for late career physicians. Naturalistic assessment of everyday multitasking in Parkinson's disease with and without mild cognitive impairment.
×
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