. 2016 Jun;59(3):533–545. doi: 10.1044/2015_JSLHR-L-15-0022

Table 2.

Story-goodness results: Study 1.

Measure	HFA	TD	F	p	η_p ²
Story composite ^a	−0.29 (0.54), −1.35 to 0.95	0.29 (0.46), −0.26 to 1.12	10.24	.003	.27
Story completeness ^b	4.4 (1.5), 2 to 6	5.2 (0.80), 4 to 6	3.54	.07	.11
Story grammar ^c	.60 (.23), .17 to 1.0	.62 (.20), .23 to .60	0.07	.80	.002
Coding categories ^d
Setting	0.40 (0.83), 0 to 3	1.07 (1.33), 0 to 5	2.70	.11	.09
Internal response	0.93 (0.88), 0 to 3	1.47 (1.41), 0 to 4	1.55	.22	.05
Added/invented detail	2.13 (3.50), 0 to 13	1.40 (1.64), 0 to 5	0.54	.47	.02
Total T-units	9.73 (4.13), 5 to 19	11.8 (4.50), 7 to 22	1.72	.20	.06

Note. Data are shown as M (SD), range. HFA = high-functioning autism; TD = typical development.

Average z-scores.

Average score out of 6 total.

Average proportion (i.e., sum of T-units that fell into the categories of initiating event, attempt, and direct consequences divided by the total number of T-units in the narrative).

Average frequency.