PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11883583

Object-recognition tasks: comparing paper versions to computerized laboratory methods.

Jody Guyette·Christopher Koch
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This study attempts to generalize Biederman's 1987 findings regarding Recognition by Components theory, which were obtained using a computer administered object-recognition task, to an analog or paper task that is consistent with typical assessment or testing procedures. Three versions of an object-recognition task were developed after the Structure of Intellect-Learning Abilities Test by Meeker, Meeker, and Roid. One version contained randomly fragmented objects, one contained objects with vertices present, and the third contained objects with midsegments. 30 participants were administered each of the three versions in a counterbalanced order. The results are consistent with those of Biederman. Objects with missing vertices were more difficult to recognize than objects with missing midsegments. There was no difference between randomly fragmented objects and those with vertices present. Implications for object-recognition research and test-item development are discussed. In particular, it is suggested that perceptual theories should be used in developing test items to gain greater control in creating items of appropriate difficulty and to increase the validity of the overall instrument.

Explore related subjects

ComputersHumansRecognition, PsychologyComparative StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jody Guyette, Christopher Koch. 2002. Object-recognition tasks: comparing paper versions to computerized laboratory methods.. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.2002.94.1.333

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

[Computerized physician order entry, a tool for added safety in the hospital].

DRUG-RELATED IATROGENIC NOSOCOMIAL ILLNESS: Remains a matter of concern in the public health area. Responsibility of hospitals is challenged by the ever increasing number of patients' claims. Dysfunction in the drug-prescribing and delivery system account, to a large extent, for medication errors, some of them resulting in adverse drug events. Most generally, medication ordering by the physician is handwritten, without nominative recapitulating prescriptions, and followed by nurse transcriptions and a global medication order is transmitted to the pharmacy. This system does not integrate the pharmaceutical analysis of the prescription, before distribution of the drugs. THE COMPUTERIZED DRUG ORDER ENTRY PROCESS: The prescription is entered directly and is displayed on the computer screen, together with the previous prescriptions for the same patient. Transcription is hence eliminated. Depending on the sophistication of the software, the prescription undergoes a series of tests; warnings and reminders can be displayed online before the physician validates the prescription. Moreover, various guidelines in some aspects of drug therapy may be presented online before the prescription is completed. POSSIBILITIES: The pharmacist's access to the complete prescriptions permits analysis of the quality and safety of the prescriptions and the adequation with eventual current applicable recommendations. Prospective drug utilization review, with immediate feedback to the prescribing physician in case of concern, may be undertaken, further improving the quality of drug therapy. Moreover, a work sheet is printed out for the nurses, further enhancing the safety of drug administration and validation. The computerized drug network also permits the development of other functions. A TOOL FOR SAFETY: Currently available reports in the literature suggest that computerized drug prescription reduces the incidence of prescribing errors, improves the appropriateness of drug choices, optimises therapeutic follow-up, and reduces the incidence adverse drug events and leads to substantial reduction in drug expenditures.

Computers↗