Descriptor
| Discourse Analysis | 2 |
| Interrater Reliability | 2 |
| Test Reliability | 2 |
| Aphasia | 1 |
| Coding | 1 |
| Communication Disorders | 1 |
| Evaluation Methods | 1 |
| Evaluation Problems | 1 |
| Evaluation Research | 1 |
| Examiners | 1 |
| Generalizability Theory | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Author
| Hux, Karen | 1 |
| Powell, Thomas W. | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Direct linkPowell, Thomas W. – Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 2006
The third edition of the "Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination" (Goodglass, Kaplan, and Barresi) introduced standardized procedures for coding discourse samples elicited using the well known Cookie Theft illustration. To evaluate the reliability of this discourse coding procedure, a transcribed sample was coded by 14 novice examiners…
Descriptors: Examiners, Interrater Reliability, Test Reliability, Aphasia
Peer reviewedHux, Karen; And Others – Journal of Communication Disorders, 1997
A study evaluated and compared four methods of assessing reliability on one discourse analysis procedure--a modified version of Damico's Clinical Discourse Analysis. The methods were Pearson product-moment correlations; interobserver agreement; Cohen's kappa; and generalizability coefficients. The strengths and weaknesses of the methods are…
Descriptors: Communication Disorders, Discourse Analysis, Evaluation Methods, Evaluation Problems
