Comparison of the effectiveness of two storytelling methods through visualization and pantomime on emotional dyslexia of children with hearing problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aim: The present study was conducted with the aim of comparing the effectiveness of two storytelling methods through visualization and pantomime on the emotional dyslexia of students with hearing problems. Methods: The research is of an applied type and an experimental research design and in the form of a pre-test-post-test with a control group. The statistical population of this research includes all deaf female students aged 7-14 years old in District 20 of Tehran who were studying in 1400-1401. The sample used was selected based on the opinion and purpose of the sampling method. 24 students from 14 to 7 years old were selected in an accessible and targeted manner and randomly divided into three groups (8 people in the group of storytelling training through mental imagery, 8 people in the group under training with pantomime and 8 people in the control group) were replaced. In this research, the analysis of emotional dyslexia of Toronto (Bagby, Parker and Taylor, 1994) was used. Results: In the research, it is reported that the deviation of the standards in the pre-test and post-test stages is reported in the experimental and control groups. And you can see that emotional ataxia has decreased in the post-test of the experimental groups. It means that both methods in identification were about the same size. But there was a significant difference between the experimental groups and the control group, which shows that the narration through both methods and pantomime over visualization has been effective in diagnosing the treatment and has become a reduction. Conclusion: The results showed that the difference between the experimental groups of storytelling through illustration and pantomime is not significant in the difficulty in identifying emotions. This means that both methods have been equally effective in the difficulty of identifying emotions. But there was a significant difference between the experimental groups and the control group, which shows that storytelling through both visualization and pantomime methods has been effective and effective on the difficulty in identifying emotions and has led to its reduction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".