ผลต่างระหว่างรุ่นของ "หน้าหลัก"

จาก wiki.surinsanghasociety
ไปยังการนำทาง ไปยังการค้นหา
แถว 1: แถว 1:
S find it fruitful to engage older adults in identifying causes
+
Cted that temporal discounting alternatives could be far better represented by a
S locate it fruitful to engage older adults in identifying causes of changes in wellness, and from there, they collect the detailed details that mayMethods Inf Med. Author manuscript; readily available in PMC 2014 June 18.Le et al.Pageindirectly be tied to element levels of well being information. Well being care providers can use the visual displays for holistic views of wellness to facilitate a broad, open discussion for shared decision producing with older adults.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript6. ConclusionWe applied cognitive design principles to develop three diverse visual displays of integrated well being primarily based on data collected from an eight-week pilot study at an older adult independent and assisted living facility [18, 23]. We evaluated these visual displays with HCPs for 3 concentrate groups of size ranging amongst two and 5 participants. The purpose in the concentrate groups was to supply an evaluation with the visual displays and to much better understand the processes involved by HCPs through the visualization approach. Via a qualitative descriptive evaluation of concentrate group data, we located that HCPs are inquisitive concerning the supply of information to get a provided visual display. To make displays successful, it is actually essential that HCPs comprehend exactly where the information is coming from and are comfy with its integration into the visualization. Without the need of this trust in the data supply, HCPs are reluctant to location credence towards a visualization and typically obtain it has limited application. Specifically for novel visual displays, not simply instruction but additionally gaining provider buy-in by means of piloting and validation are critical prior to implementation. The cognitive challenges connected with our visual displays highlight a have to have for clarity (labeling, color, granularity and contrast) and reduction of complexity (cognitive overload). This can be consistent with a lot of design principles that emphasize a minimalist method towards information visualization [2]. We can generalize our final results for the style of future visual displays of overall health data applying these set of suggestions derived in the concentrate groups. The concentrate groups also provided useful inputs towards the evaluation of our visual displays. These evaluations let us to refine our visual styles as a part of an iterative process of style. Well being care providers found value in each a holistic and element based view of data in the visualizations, but for unique causes. A holistic view permits for swift cursory glances and supplies capability to engage older adults with discussions on the wellness information even though a element view makes it possible for identifications of trends in general wellness and capacity to see exactly where further focused assessment is needed. In addressing the desires of HCPs, designers need to take into consideration minimalized visual displays for broad level views of facts even though nevertheless allowing for the show of granular categorized places of details (e.g., via an interactive visualization). An effective design that synthesizes data will let clinicians to much more conveniently interpret details, independent of talent level or prior know-how. For our perform, the visualizations are early prototypes and in the feedback received, might be enhanced by addressing each functional and cognitive problems inside the display.
+
Cted that temporal discounting options will be greater represented by a hyperbolic than exponential curve (Rachlin et al., 1991; Green et al., 1997; Johnson and Bickel, 2002; Myerson et al., 2003; Robles and Vargas, 2007; Steinberg et al., 2009). We expected considerable associations involving the four indicators of temporal discounting and that reaction instances would be greater in the indifference point choice than in the other choices. The preference to get a larger delayed reward was also anticipated to be drastically linked with higher cognitive abilities, dispositional tendencies toward much more persistence in pondering and CFCs, and significantly less substance use and gambling behavior.Components and MethodsParticipantsThe final sample consisted of 99 participants (37 males and 62 females) from an undergraduate university sample. The imply age with the sample was 20.72 years (SD = two.36, range = 18?30 years of age). Participants had been recruited on a university campus, and each volunteer received  15 for 1 h of participation. As inclusion criteria, participants had been needed to possess English as a 1st language or have already been schooled in English and should have spoken English for at least ten years. Initial year undergraduate students comprised 29.three  of your sample, 32.three  were second year undergraduates, 12.1  have been third year undergraduates, 18.two  have been fourth year undergraduates, and 8  had graduated or have been post-undergraduate continuing education students.Measures Temporal Discounting TaskA staircase version of a temporal discounting decision activity adapted from Rachlin et al. (1991) was utilized within this study. This task was administered on a personal computer working with the plan Media Lab. This activity involved creating many hypothetical choices amongst an quick reward plus a delayed fixed reward. There have been 5 delay periods (1 month, 1, 5, ten, and 25 years) crossed with two reward magnitudes ( 100 and 10,000), both withinsubject variables. The instant variable reward changed within a sequential staircase manner by elements of 10. As an example, inside the  one hundred reward magnitude block, the immediate reward changed by  10 increments ( ten,  20,  30,  40,  50,  60,  70,  80,  90,Associations between Behavioral Outcomes and Temporal DiscountingThere can be a sizable literature to suggest that temporal discounting is related with extra risky behavior. Temporal discounting studies have shown that cigarette smokers (Bickel et al., 1999), substance abusers with gambling problems (Petry and Casarella,Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.orgJune 2015 | Volume 6 | ArticleBasile and ToplakTemporal discounting and individual differencesand  one hundred). Each and every participant created a total of 100 alternatives (two reward magnitudes ?five delay periods ?10 trials at each reward magnitude and delay period)1 . For the temporal discounting process, our criteria to decide the indifference point was a switch followed by two constant selections following the switch (primarily based on Hurst et al., 2010). We didn't identify any non-systematic responders around the temporal discounting process. It ought to also be noted that the participants had been individually tested with an experimenter, plus the experimenter would have clarified any unusual responding through the testing session. The reaction time for each and every choice within the temporal discounting activity was also collected. Four sets of dependent variables have been derived from this task.

รุ่นแก้ไขเมื่อ 21:34, 16 กรกฎาคม 2564

Cted that temporal discounting alternatives could be far better represented by a Cted that temporal discounting options will be greater represented by a hyperbolic than exponential curve (Rachlin et al., 1991; Green et al., 1997; Johnson and Bickel, 2002; Myerson et al., 2003; Robles and Vargas, 2007; Steinberg et al., 2009). We expected considerable associations involving the four indicators of temporal discounting and that reaction instances would be greater in the indifference point choice than in the other choices. The preference to get a larger delayed reward was also anticipated to be drastically linked with higher cognitive abilities, dispositional tendencies toward much more persistence in pondering and CFCs, and significantly less substance use and gambling behavior.Components and MethodsParticipantsThe final sample consisted of 99 participants (37 males and 62 females) from an undergraduate university sample. The imply age with the sample was 20.72 years (SD = two.36, range = 18?30 years of age). Participants had been recruited on a university campus, and each volunteer received 15 for 1 h of participation. As inclusion criteria, participants had been needed to possess English as a 1st language or have already been schooled in English and should have spoken English for at least ten years. Initial year undergraduate students comprised 29.three of your sample, 32.three were second year undergraduates, 12.1 have been third year undergraduates, 18.two have been fourth year undergraduates, and 8 had graduated or have been post-undergraduate continuing education students.Measures Temporal Discounting TaskA staircase version of a temporal discounting decision activity adapted from Rachlin et al. (1991) was utilized within this study. This task was administered on a personal computer working with the plan Media Lab. This activity involved creating many hypothetical choices amongst an quick reward plus a delayed fixed reward. There have been 5 delay periods (1 month, 1, 5, ten, and 25 years) crossed with two reward magnitudes ( 100 and 10,000), both withinsubject variables. The instant variable reward changed within a sequential staircase manner by elements of 10. As an example, inside the one hundred reward magnitude block, the immediate reward changed by 10 increments ( ten, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90,Associations between Behavioral Outcomes and Temporal DiscountingThere can be a sizable literature to suggest that temporal discounting is related with extra risky behavior. Temporal discounting studies have shown that cigarette smokers (Bickel et al., 1999), substance abusers with gambling problems (Petry and Casarella,Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.orgJune 2015 | Volume 6 | ArticleBasile and ToplakTemporal discounting and individual differencesand one hundred). Each and every participant created a total of 100 alternatives (two reward magnitudes ?five delay periods ?10 trials at each reward magnitude and delay period)1 . For the temporal discounting process, our criteria to decide the indifference point was a switch followed by two constant selections following the switch (primarily based on Hurst et al., 2010). We didn't identify any non-systematic responders around the temporal discounting process. It ought to also be noted that the participants had been individually tested with an experimenter, plus the experimenter would have clarified any unusual responding through the testing session. The reaction time for each and every choice within the temporal discounting activity was also collected. Four sets of dependent variables have been derived from this task.