CHAT/CLAN discussion

Fri Jun 17 16:20:33 UTC 2005

Dear Yahya,

I have working with CLAN/CHAT for about 14 years now using it to code 
both verbal and nonverbal data with children with SLI. It is by far the 
fastest and most efficient format available if one wants to have 
sophisticated measure of language analysis combined with a high degree 
of user-flexibility.
  If your coding system is sufficiently developed for you study prior to 
your beginning your transcription, then transcribing and coding 
language samples in the CHAT/CLAN system is a breeze.
The transcripts can be easily exported into a format that is accessible 
for SPSS analysis as well as Excel - we do this all the time using 
STATFREQ.

I also use the CHAT/CLAN system quite extensively in our gesture/speech 
mismatch studies.
In several of these gesture/speech mismatch studies, we have children 
retell several video vignettes to make sure we get sufficient gestures 
for the children.
We transcribe these multiple retell session for each child in one CHAT 
transcript using EG, and BG tiers that allow us to analyze only one 
session or all sessions at a time. We then export these files to Excel/
Filemaker/SPSS depending on what it is we need to do with the data 
after that.
We often code gesture independent of speech in CLAN/CHAT on %ges: 
tiers).

We also have used several nested levels of coding of both speech and 
gesture systems. Using the Editor, coding nested systems is very easy 
as well, and the CLAN/CHAT systems has this great feature where is 
sorts and rank orders your codes depending upon their frequency of 
occurrence. While Brian put this feature in to make coding faster, it 
if very affective in showing what are the most frequent patterns in 
your date. We've been quite surprised sometimes.

So at least we have found that the ability to work both from video and 
audio files makes the CHILDES system really quite exceptional.

  It might be that you have some unique needs that might warrant further 
questions to Brian -- sorry Brian ;)
or to the info-childes discussion list?

Sincerely,
Julia

On Jun 17, 2005, at 10:55 AM, Bracha Nir-Sagiv wrote:

>  Dear Yahya,
>  I am a research assistant at Ruth Berman's lab at Tel Aviv 
> university, where I have extensively used the CHILDES system in the 
> framework of several studies on lexicon and morpho-syntax in both 
> early and later language development as well as on discourse 
> development. The system has proved itself an invaluable resource for 
> multiple analyses, as it is so well adapted to the needs of linguists 
> and language researchers. Although the system requires you to "stick" 
> to specific conventions (which is an advantage in itself, as it 
> enables you to compare across databases), I have found it quite 
> flexible, and was able to find ways to implement whatever analysis 
> needed. As to your statements, I can say that:
>  - Working first with MS Word and then converting to CHILDES is 
> possible (and rather easy), although you have to be careful when 
> converting the files, especially if you are going to use special 
> fonts. But working within CHAT mode is very easy and very efficient - 
> not only can you insert dependent tiers as you go along, you can 
> insert main tier codes (no need to copy-paste), work directly with 
> sound files, and constantly check your work and learn from your 
> mistakes. Also, since CHAT files are TXT based, I don't see a reason 
> for having difficulties in exporting to other programs - on the 
> contrary, I have found it much less complicated than exporting WORD 
> documents, and there are even several CLAN utilities that can help you 
> perform whatever adjustments you might need.
>  - CLAN allows you to do much more than count codes or compute ratios, 
> for example, I have been able to use it for complicated automatic 
> analyses, automatically code extensive corpora at different levels, 
> create concordances, compute frequencies, analyze texts from specific 
> words to entire units, compare parent input with child output and so 
> on. If you prepare the files according to instructions (for example, 
> use the ID tier), you can run a statistics utility (STATFREQ) which 
> enables you to import data directly into Excel (and from there very 
> easily into SPSS). No need to type by hand.
>  - It is also possible to overcome the problem of nested structures, 
> it is all a function of how you transcribe the main speaker tier and 
> of the codes you choose to use (and this is also a very good point - 
> you can use whichever codes you want, all you have to do is define 
> them). Even if there are things that can't be visually represented 
> within the file, you can always use a special code.
>
>  I hope my answer has been of help, and can only sum up by saying that 
> I highly recommend using the CHILDES system.
>  Good luck with your work,
>  Bracha Nir-Sagiv
>  Department of Linguistics
>  Tel-Aviv University
>
>
>
>  Yahya E-rramdani wrote:
>> Dear Colleagues,
>> In preparation of the transcription and the analysis of data of a 
>> research on child language development (3-6 years), focussing on: 
>> lexicon, morpho-syntax and discourse, we have been discussing the 
>> (dis)-advantages of using CHAT/CLAN programme. I am listing below a 
>> number of statements on the disadvantages of using CHAT/CLAN in data 
>> analysis. I would like from to hear from you whether these statements 
>> are true or. 
>> 	• 	We should reconsider whether to make transcripts directly in CHAT 
>> or first in MS Word (and to export the transcript as .rtf to CHAT or 
>> to another processor). Arguments contra working directly in CHAT: 
>> less flexibility, more difficulties with exporting to other programs.
>> 	• 	There is discussion and careful consideration needed how to do 
>> the actual coding. The classical CHAT-approach is adding (and filling 
>> out) code-lines below each utterance. With the analysis program CLAN 
>> a number of operations are possible, but as far as we know it all 
>> boils down to counting codes per transcript or computing a ratio. For 
>> further analysis, over sessions and subjects, a form of exportation 
>> to SPSS (or EXCEL) is needed, but CHAT/CLAN seems to lack direct 
>> options for that. Exportation will mean entering data (that is, 
>> printed results from many CLAN-runs) in SPSS by hand.
>> 	• 	Another disadvantage is that CHAT/CLAN seems to have difficulties 
>> with dealing with different levels of aggregation, that is, provides 
>> no explicit and easy ways of coding of the ‘multilevel/nested’ 
>> structure of the speech data. SPSS (or EXCEL) is much more 
>> transparent in this respect and has procedures for computing 
>> aggregate scores (and the reverse, for de-aggregating scores).
>>
>> We welcome all other comments on the use of CHAT/CLAN in general. 
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Yahya E-Rramdani
>> Tilburg University
>> Babylon: Centre for Studies of the Multicultural Society
>> Tilburg University
>> PB 90153
>> 5000 LE Tilburg
>> The Netherlands
>> Tel: +31 (0)13-466.20.27
>> FAx: +31-(0)13-466.31.10
>> http://let.uvt.nl/GENERAL/PEOPLE/YE-RRAMD/
>>
>>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System
>>  at the Tel-Aviv University CC.
>>
Julia L. Evans, Ph.D. ccc.slp
Associate Professor
Communicative Disorders, Psychology
Director, Child Language and Cognitive Processes Lab
1975 Willow Drive, Rm 457
University of Wisconsin - Madison
Madison, WI 53706

"Let no child be demeaned, nor have their wonder diminished, because of 
our ignorance or inactivity.
Let no child be deprived of discovery because we lack the resources to 
discover their problem.
Let no child - EVER - doubt themselves or their mind because we are 
unsure of our commitment"

Foundation For Children With Learning Disabilities
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 9128 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20050617/807d14e7/attachment.bin>