Reply
Page 2 of 3:  1  2  3  
Thread Tools  
Daniel Gonzalez
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Daniel Gonzalez is on a distinguished road Posts: 11
Posted March 24th, 2017 #11
We have tried running the file and there are still some things we did not get them to work properly. In the first place, we want to establish exactly 10 CS + and 10 CS-, under the conditions previously mentioned. In the file, we have tried to change the maximum from <10 (previously established) to <11, trying to fix it, but the problem persisted (sometimes appear 7 CS + and 6 CS-, others 8 CS- and 6 CS +, 7 CS+ and 9 CS-, etc.). Our intention, as we have indicated, is that 10 CS + and 10 CS- must appear, randomly and with the restrictions previously indicated. Second, we have noticed that the ITIs may sometimes appear consecutively (eg lasting 3 s., others times lasting 6s, 8s, 9s, etc.). This should not happen because the variable was defined between 1 and 3 s.

In addition, we must note that we have selected "Present trials in this block = 20 times" in the tab "Looping" in "Block editor", and we donīt know if it can be behind those problems.

Finally, we would also like to add a final message indicating the completion of the experiment.

Thank you again for your help.
Reply With Quote
Arman
Support
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Arman is on a distinguished road Posts: 158
Posted March 24th, 2017 #12
You are correct. The stimuli do not reach 10 presentations because block looping was limited. I've changed it to infinite looping.

On that note, in order to stop the looping and present an end message, I've set criteria in the block's When to Present tab: only present when total CS+ or CS- count is < 10.

I've also made other changes that will prevent your experiment from getting stuck and presenting ITIs consecutively. I've done this by adding rules to the ITI trial and removing a criterion from CS+ and CS- trials.
Attached Files
File Type: sl5 rtFeedback5.sl5 (13.1 KB, 3 views)
Reply With Quote
Daniel Gonzalez
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Daniel Gonzalez is on a distinguished road Posts: 11
Posted March 27th, 2017 #13
The experiment is almost finished, it works perfectly whether it responds slower than the previous time (Feedback not shown) or responds faster than the previous time (Feedback message is displayed). However, we have tried to program it so that the time limit to which the participant can respond is 2 sec. after the start of the tone, and in case of no response during this interval, continue to ITI (something similar to the situation of "if it responds slower than the previous time"). The problem is that sometimes, when the participant donīt press the space bar, the Feedback message is displayed.

On the other hand, we also want that, when the participant gives a correct response (faster than the previous one and the Feedback is presented), the feedback message stays on the screen for 2 seconds and the participant doesnīt have to press the bar to continue.

If we could fix this problem, the experiment would be ready. To do this, we upload a copy of the experiment in superlab, and the CS and tone used, so you can test it under the same conditions.

Thank you again for your help.
Attached Images
File Type: png CS+ Red Square.PNG (4.2 KB, 0 views)
File Type: png CS- Blue Triangle.PNG (7.2 KB, 0 views)
Attached Files
File Type: sl5 ExperimentFeedback.sl5 (12.7 KB, 2 views)
File Type: wav WN (0,4s).wav (34.5 KB, 1 views)
Reply With Quote
Arman
Support
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Arman is on a distinguished road Posts: 158
Posted March 29th, 2017 #14
See the experiment package attached.

I merged the tone and response into one event that lasts 2 seconds or until the space bar is pressed (correct response). If pressed, then the trial's tag is set to correct; I've changed the rules so that the feedback only presents when this occurs.

I've also changed the time limit on the feedback event to last 2 seconds and end on its own.
Attached Files
File Type: zip rtFeedback6.zip (10.2 KB, 5 views)
Reply With Quote
Daniel Gonzalez
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Daniel Gonzalez is on a distinguished road Posts: 11
Posted March 31st, 2017 #15
We have detected that the rule "no more than 2 CS+ or 2 CS- followed" sometimes doesnīt work in last trials, for example, when 10 CS+ have already been presented, but there are still 4, 5 or 6 CS- left, they appear consecutively, breaking the rule of "no more than 2 equal trials followed". We would like to know if there is any way to satisfy this rule and keep the rest rules unmodified (10 trials of each CS, positive feedback, etc).

Thank you very much.
Reply With Quote
Arman
Support
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Arman is on a distinguished road Posts: 158
Posted March 31st, 2017 #16
This occurs because of the random presentation of CS+ or CS- in concert with its limitations (max consecutive: 2, max total: 10). Are these not requirements of your design?
Reply With Quote
Daniel Gonzalez
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Daniel Gonzalez is on a distinguished road Posts: 11
Posted April 1st, 2017 #17
Yes, these are two requirements of our design, however, as I have previously indicated , sometimes the criterion of "no more than 2 CS + or 2 CS- followed" does not work well. For example, CS +, CS +, CS -, CS +, CS +, CS -, CS +, CS +, CS -, CS +, CS +, CS -, CS+, CS +, (until now, all the possible CS+ of the experiment have already been presented, ie 10, while only 4 CS-, so the sequence continues as follows) CS-, CS-, CS-, CS-, CS-, CS-. Thus, this shows how the rule "no more than 2CS+ or 2CS- consecutively" has been broken.

We would like to know if it is possible that it will not happen, maybe through a more balanced presentation of CSs over the course of the experiment. We suggest this because looking at the above example, if one kind of CS reachs the 10 presentations requirement very soon, the other can only reach this 10 presentarions requierement by breaking the rule "no more than 2 identical CS consecutively"). We think that a more balanced distribution of CSs throughout could help to keep both criteria unchanged, but we don't know if this is the correct solution, and, if it is correct, we don't know how to program it.

Thank you very much for your help.
Reply With Quote
Arman
Support
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Arman is on a distinguished road Posts: 158
Posted April 3rd, 2017 #18
This sort of balanced presentation will prevent randomization in portions of the experiment. There is only one way that a type of CS can catch up while not breaking the limitations that are set, and that is controlling it to present twice in a row while the other type is presented only once. I do not know your research goals or specifications so I don't know if this is an appropriate solution to your design. Let me know and I will try to implement the solution into your experiment.
Reply With Quote
Daniel Gonzalez
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Daniel Gonzalez is on a distinguished road Posts: 11
Posted April 4th, 2017 #19
If the solution you propose works, try it out in our experiment. As I mentioned above, the rules of "exactly 10 CS + and 10 CS- presentations" and "no more than 2 CS + or 2 CS- consecutively" have to be mainteined. It is important not to break any of these rules as it is happening now (with more than 2 identical CSs presentations appearing consecutively in the last trials of the experiment). Indeed, when applied in this way, it would not be a randomization, but it would be a pseudo-randomization.

The rest of the conditions donīt have to change either.

Thank you very much for your effort and help.
Reply With Quote
Arman
Support
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Arman is on a distinguished road Posts: 158
Posted April 4th, 2017 #20
If one CS is ahead of the other by a certain amount, then it is impossible to prevent your requirements from being broken. This point of no return seems to be when the remaining presentations of one CS is more than twice of the remaining presentations of the other; when Remaining CS1 > Remaining CS2 * 2.

I have created counters and rules that force-present CS1 (and CS2) just before this point; when Remaining CS1 = Remaining CS2 * 2

Please test the attached experiment.
Attached Files
File Type: zip rtFeedback7.zip (10.5 KB, 3 views)
Reply With Quote
Reply « Previous Thread - SuperLab 4 Support - Next Thread »
Page 2 of 3:  1  2  3  
Tags
classical conditioning, feedback, reaction time, reaction time as us, superlab 4.5
Thread Tools
Posting Rules
Forum Jump:
Đ Copyright Cedrus Corporation, 1991-2014.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:58 AM.