4.3 Article

Effect of Message Type on the Visual Attention of Adults With Traumatic Brain Injury

期刊

出版社

AMER SPEECH-LANGUAGE-HEARING ASSOC
DOI: 10.1044/2016_AJSLP-16-0024

关键词

-

资金

  1. Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research in the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services [H133E080011, H133E140026]
  2. National Institute on Disability, Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research in the Department of Health and Human Services [90RE5017-02-01]
  3. Tobii Technologies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The purpose of this investigation was to measure the effect of message type (i.e., action, naming) on the visual attention patterns of individuals with and without traumatic brain injury (TBI) when viewing grids composed of 3 types of images (i.e., icons, decontextualized photographs, and contextualized photographs). Method: Fourteen adults with TBI and 14 without TBI-assigned either to an action or naming message condition-viewed grids composed of 3 different image types. Participants' task was to select/sustain visual fixation on the image they felt best represented a stated message (i.e., action or naming). Results: With final fixation location serving as a proxy for selection, participants in the naming message condition more often than the other 2 image types. Participants in the action message condition selected contextualized photographs significantly more frequently than the other 2 image types. Minimal differences were noted between participant groups. Conclusions: This investigation provides preliminary evidence of the relationship between image and message type. Clinicians involved in the selection of images used for message representation should consider the message being represented when designing supports for people with TBI. Further research is necessary to fully understand the relationship between images and message type.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据