相关概念视频
Blinding
2.4K
Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.
2.4K
Blind Procedures
10.6K
Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which...
10.6K
The Placebo Effect
6.1K
The placebo effect occurs when people's expectations or beliefs influence or determine their experience in a given situation. In other words, simply expecting something to happen can actually make it happen.
6.1K
您也可能阅读
相关文章
通过共同作者、期刊和引用图与本文相关的文章。
排序
Same author
Alexithymia, self-reported external gain expectations, and overreporting on symptom validity tests in hospital patients: further evidence for the relevance of alexithymia.
Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists·2026
Same author
External Validation of a Prognostic Model for Outcome After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury at 6 Months Post Injury.
European journal of neurology·2026
Same author
Expert consensus on trauma-focused PTSD treatments for adults with acquired brain injury.
The Clinical neuropsychologist·2026
提供简短的纠正陈述不会改善患者的测试性能,使测试无效:一个多站点,单盲随机对照试验.
Jeroen J Roor1,2, Brechje Dandachi-FitzGerald3,4, Maarten J V Peters4
1Department of Medical Psychology, VieCuri Medical Center, Venlo, the Netherlands.
The Clinical neuropsychologist
|July 26, 2024
概括
一个简短的校正声明并没有改善那些失败了性能有效性测试 (PVTs) 的患者的测试行为. 这表明这种干预措施对提高神经心理评估准确性的价值有限.
更多相关视频
05:48The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
Published on: June 12, 2020
5.7K
07:59Using Practice Testing, Public Speaking, and Source Monitoring to Examine the Influences of Learning Strategies and Stress on Episodic Memory
Published on: June 14, 2019
7.9K
科学领域:
- 神经心理学 神经心理学
- 临床心理学 临床心理学
- 心理测量 心理测量 心理测量
背景情况:
- 性能有效性测试 (PVT) 在神经心理评估期间识别次优努力.
- PVT故障可能会损害评估结果的可靠性和有效性.
- 改善测试行为对于准确的诊断评估至关重要.
研究的目的:
- 调查一下,简短的,会话中的纠正陈述是否可以改善未通过PVT的个体的表现.
- 为了确定纠正陈述对后续认知测试表现和重复PVT分数的影响.
主要方法:
- 一个多站点,单盲随机对照试验,涉及196名成年患者.
- 没有初始PVT的患者被随机分配到纠正陈述 (CS) 组或无纠正陈述 (NO-CS) 组.
- 两组都接受了重复和新管理的认知和PVT措施.
主要成果:
- 在CS和NO-CS组之间,在重复或新增的PVT和认知测试中没有显著差异.
- 与那些通过PVT的人相比,最初没有通过PVT的参与者从重复测试中获得的益处较小.
- 一个简短的纠正陈述并没有提高性能有效性或认知分数.
结论:
- 在PVT失败后,简短的,会话内的纠正声明在改善测试行为方面是无效的.
- 目前的研究结果表明,简单的口头反对于解决不良表现的有用性有限.
- 需要进一步的研究来制定有效的策略,以提高患者的努力,并确保评估的有效性.
