22 resultados para Arbitration Agreement
em CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK
Resumo:
Name agreement is the extent to which different people agree on a name for a particular picture. Previous studies have found that it takes longer to name low name agreement pictures than high name agreement pictures. To examine the effect of name agreement in the online process of picture naming, we compared event-related potentials (ERPs) recorded whilst 19 healthy, native English speakers silently named pictures which had either high or low name agreement. A series of ERP components was examined: P1 approximately 120ms from picture onset, N1 around 170ms, P2 around 220ms, N2 around 290ms, and P3 around 400ms. Additionally, a late time window from 800 to 900ms was considered. Name agreement had an early effect, starting at P1 and possibly resulting from uncertainty of picture identity, and continuing into N2, possibly resulting from alternative names for pictures. These results support the idea that name agreement affects two consecutive processes: first, object recognition, and second, lexical selection and/or phonological encoding.
Resumo:
Background and Objectives: People with Williams syndrome (WS) have been reported by their carers to have problems with attention, anxiety and social relationships. People with WS have been shown to report their anxieties. This study extends our knowledge of how people with WS see themselves in terms of behaviour and social relationships. Methods: A survey using self and parent report forms of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Results: Both parents and individuals with WS (N = 31) reported difficulties in emotional disorder and hyperactivity symptoms and strengths in prosocial behaviours such as altruism and empathy. They disagreed about peer problems. Conclusions: People with WS understand some but not all of their difficulties. In particular they fail to recognize their social difficulties which may lead them to be vulnerable to exploitation.
Resumo:
This paper sets out an example of a standard agricultural tenancy, being one creating a tenancy from year to year and consequently covered by the agricultural holdings legislation. A facing-page commentary gives a clause-by-clause analysis of the agreement, the implications of each provision being discussed in the light of the law of contract, agricultural holdings legislation and, where appropriate, subsequent caselaw.
Resumo:
Abstract Background: The analysis of the Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) is of fundamental importance to the investigation of the auditory system behaviour, though its interpretation has a subjective nature because of the manual process employed in its study and the clinical experience required for its analysis. When analysing the ABR, clinicians are often interested in the identification of ABR signal components referred to as Jewett waves. In particular, the detection and study of the time when these waves occur (i.e., the wave latency) is a practical tool for the diagnosis of disorders affecting the auditory system. Significant differences in inter-examiner results may lead to completely distinct clinical interpretations of the state of the auditory system. In this context, the aim of this research was to evaluate the inter-examiner agreement and variability in the manual classification of ABR. Methods: A total of 160 ABR data samples were collected, for four different stimulus intensity (80dBHL, 60dBHL, 40dBHL and 20dBHL), from 10 normal-hearing subjects (5 men and 5 women, from 20 to 52 years). Four examiners with expertise in the manual classification of ABR components participated in the study. The Bland-Altman statistical method was employed for the assessment of inter-examiner agreement and variability. The mean, standard deviation and error for the bias, which is the difference between examiners’ annotations, were estimated for each pair of examiners. Scatter plots and histograms were employed for data visualization and analysis. Results: In most comparisons the differences between examiner’s annotations were below 0.1 ms, which is clinically acceptable. In four cases, it was found a large error and standard deviation (>0.1 ms) that indicate the presence of outliers and thus, discrepancies between examiners. Conclusions: Our results quantify the inter-examiner agreement and variability of the manual analysis of ABR data, and they also allows for the determination of different patterns of manual ABR analysis.
Resumo:
Previous research suggests that the processing of agreement is affected by the distance between the agreeing elements. However, the unique contribution of structural distance (number of intervening syntactic phrases) to the processing of agreement remains an open question, since previous investigations do not tease apart structural and linear distance (number of intervening words). We used event related potentials (ERPs) to examine the extent to which structural distance impacts the processing of Spanish number and gender agreement. Violations were realized both within the phrase and across the phrase. Across both levels of structural distance, linear distance was kept constant, as was the syntactic category of the agreeing elements. Number and gender agreement violations elicited a robust P600 between 400 and 900ms, a component associated with morphosyntactic processing. No amplitude differences were observed between number and gender violations, suggesting that the two features are processed similarly at the brain level. Within-phrase agreement yielded more positive waveforms than across-phrase agreement, both for agreement violations and for grammatical sentences (no agreement by distance interaction). These effects can be interpreted as evidence that structural distance impacts the establishment of agreement overall, consistent with sentence processing models which predict that hierarchical structure impacts the processing of syntactic dependencies. However, due to the lack of an agreement by distance interaction, the possibility cannot be ruled out that these effects are driven by differences in syntactic predictability between the within-phrase and across-phrase configurations, notably the fact that the syntactic category of the critical word was more predictable in the within-phrase conditions.