• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The British journal of psychiatry : >Authors' reply
【24h】

Authors' reply

机译：作者的回信

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

We very, much appreciate the concerns Dr Maatz raises. Indeed, we raised many of them in our discussion. Here we'll take the opportunity to elaborate on our decision-making process with regard to the analyses we reported. As Dr Maatz and we ourselves point out, we did not include a non-psychiatric control group in our analysis. We found it difficult to identify an appropriate control for our particular corpus. Writing about illness in a journal for medical professionals is a rather particular kind of enterprise that commands specific language. We considered the caregiver and family-member accounts in the Schizophrenia Bulletin (which Dr Maatz called 'second-person accounts'). However, we were concerned about comparing samples with different themes (writing about oneself in the first group, writing about other people in the proposed control group). That would almost certainly change pronoun use. Furthermore, family members can sometimes present with attenuated, subclinical versions of the experiences, behaviours and deficits observed in psychotic illness.2 We thought these might detract from our original objective, which was to analyse word use by people with schizophrenia compared with that by individuals with another mental illness.
机译：我们非常感谢Maatz博士提出的关注。确实，我们在讨论中提出了许多建议。在这里，我们将借此机会详细阐述我们报告的分析过程中的决策过程。正如Maatz博士和我们自己指出的那样，我们的分析中未包括非精神病对照组。我们发现很难为我们的特定语料库确定合适的控件。在医学专业杂志上写有关疾病的报道是一种非常特殊的企业，它使用特定的语言。我们在精神分裂症通报中考虑了照顾者和家庭成员的账户（Maatz博士称其为“第二人称账户”）。但是，我们担心比较具有不同主题的样本（在第一组中写自己，在建议的对照组中写别人）。这几乎肯定会改变代词的用法。此外，家庭成员有时可能会表现出精神疾病中所见到的经验，行为和缺陷的弱化亚临床版本。2我们认为，这可能会损害我们最初的目标，即分析精神分裂症患者与个人相比使用单词的情况患有另一种精神疾病。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号