Comparison of Gross Pathology, Histopathology, and Mycobacterial Culture for the Diagnosis of Tuberculosis in Elk (Cervus elaphus)

Using the isolation of Mycobacterium bovis as the reference standard, this study evaluated the sensitivity, specificity and kappa statistic of gross pathology (abattoir postmortem inspection), histopathology, and parallel or series combinations of the two for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in 430 elk and red deer. Two histopathology interpretations were evaluated: histopathology I, where the presence of lesions compatible with tuberculosis was considered positive, and histopathology II, where lesions compatible with tuberculosis or a select group of additional possible diagnoses were considered positive. In the 73 animals from which M. bovis was isolated, gross lesions of tuberculosis were most often in the lung (48), the retropharyngeal lymph nodes (36), the mesenteric lymph nodes (35), and the mediastinal lymph nodes (16). Other mycobacterial isolates included: 11 M. paratuberculosis, 11 M. avium, and 28 rapidly growing species or M. terrae complex. The sensitivity estimates of gross pathology and histopathology I were 93% (95% confidence limits [CL] 84,97%) and 88% [CL 77,94%], respectively, and the specificity of both was 89% [CL 85,92%]). The sensitivity and specificity of histopathology II were 89% (CL 79,95%) and 77% (CL 72,81%), respectively. The highest sensitivity estimates (93- 95% [CL 84,98%]) were obtained by interpreting gross pathology and histopathology in parallel (where an animal had to be positive on at least one of the two, to be classified as combination positive). The highest specificity estimates (94-95% [CL 91-97%]) were generated when the two tests were interpreted in series (an animal had to be positive on both tests to be classified as combination positive). The presence of gross or microscopic lesions showed moderate to good agreement with the isolation of M. bovis (Kappa = 65-69%). The results show that post-mortem inspection, histopathology and culture do not necessarily recognize the same infected animals and that the spectra of animals identified by the tests overlaps.

The Perception of Natural, Cell Phone, and Computer-Synthesized Speech During The Performance Of Simultaneous Visual-Motor Tasks

This study investigated the influence of top-down and bottom-up information on speech perception in complex listening environments. Specifically, the effects of listening to different types of processed speech were examined on intelligibility and on simultaneous visual-motor performance. The goal was to extend the generalizability of results in speech perception to environments outside of the laboratory. The effect of bottom-up information was evaluated with natural, cell phone and synthetic speech. The effect of simultaneous tasks was evaluated with concurrent visual-motor and memory tasks. Earlier works on the perception of speech during simultaneous visual-motor tasks have shown inconsistent results (Choi, 2004; Strayer & Johnston, 2001). In the present experiments, two dual-task paradigms were constructed in order to mimic non-laboratory listening environments. In the first two experiments, an auditory word repetition task was the primary task and a visual-motor task was the secondary task. Participants were presented with different kinds of speech in a background of multi-speaker babble and were asked to repeat the last word of every sentence while doing the simultaneous tracking task. Word accuracy and visual-motor task performance were measured. Taken together, the results of Experiments 1 and 2 showed that the intelligibility of natural speech was better than synthetic speech and that synthetic speech was better perceived than cell phone speech. The visual-motor methodology was found to demonstrate independent and supplemental information and provided a better understanding of the entire speech perception process. Experiment 3 was conducted to determine whether the automaticity of the tasks (Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977) helped to explain the results of the first two experiments. It was found that cell phone speech allowed better simultaneous pursuit rotor performance only at low intelligibility levels when participants ignored the listening task. Also, simultaneous task performance improved dramatically for natural speech when intelligibility was good. Overall, it could be concluded that knowledge of intelligibility alone is insufficient to characterize processing of different speech sources. Additional measures such as attentional demands and performance of simultaneous tasks were also important in characterizing the perception of different kinds of speech in complex listening environments.

Literacy Research: Issues of Authority, Ownership, and Representation

With the “social turn” of language in the past decade within English studies, ethnographic and teacher research methods increasingly have acquired legitimacy as a means of studying student literacy. And with this legitimacy, graduate students specializing in literacy and composition studies increasingly are being encouraged to use ethnographic and teacher research methods to study student literacy within classrooms. Yet few of the narratives produced from these studies discuss the problems that frequently arise when participant observers enter the classroom. Recently, some researchers have begun to interrogate the extent to which ethnographic and teacher research methods are able to construct and disseminate knowledge in empowering ways (Anderson & Irvine, 1993; Bishop, 1993; Fine, 1994; Fleischer. 1994; McLaren, 1992). While ethnographic and teacher research methods have oftentimes been touted as being more democratic and nonhierarchical than quantitative methods—-which oftentimes erase individuals lived experiences with numbers and statistical formulas—-researchers are just beginning to probe the ways that ethnographic and teacher research models can also be silencing, unreflective, and oppressive. Those who have begun to question the ethics of conducting, writing about, and disseminating knowledge in education have coined the term “critical” research, a rather vague and loose term that proposes a position of reflexivity and self-critique for all research methods, not just ethnography or teacher research. Drawing upon theories of feminist consciousness-raising, liberatory praxis, and community-action research, theories of critical research aim to involve researchers and participants in a highly participatory framework for constructing knowledge, an inquiry that seeks to question, disrupt, or intervene in the conditions under study for some socially transformative end. While critical research methods are always contingent upon the context being studied, in general they are undergirded by principles of non-hierarchical relations, participatory collaboration, problem-posing, dialogic inquiry, and multiple and multi-voiced interpretations. In distinguishing between critical and traditional ethnographic processes, for instance, Peter McLaren says that critical ethnography asks questions such as “[u]nder what conditions and to what ends do we. as educational researchers, enter into relations of cooperation. mutuality, and reciprocity with those who we research?” (p. 78) and “what social effects do you want your evaluations and understandings to have?” (p. 83). In»the same vein, Michelle Fine suggests that critical researchers must move beyond notions of the etic/emic dichotomy of researcher positionality in order to “probe how we are in relation with the contexts we study and with our informants, understanding that we are all multiple in those relations” (p. 72). Researchers in composition and literacy stud¬ies who endorse critical research methods, then, aim to enact some sort of positive transformative change in keeping with the needs and interests of the participants with whom they work.