Main content

Home

Menu

Loading wiki pages...

View
Wiki Version:
Data Coding ----------- **IB-Tasks** For the IB-Cross tasks participants are considered to have missed the unexpected object (inattentionally blind) if they do not report noticing the unexpected object or claim to have seen something but cannot define either the location or the shape of the unexpected object. For the IB-Motion task participants are considered to have missed the unexpected object if they do not report noticing it or claim to have seen something but cannot define at least two of the following three features of the unexpected object: location, color, shape. Data from either IB task will be excluded whenever participants failed to notice the "unexpected" object on the full attention trial, when they are not doing the primary task. Data from either IB task will also be excluded for subjects who did not settle on a threshold speed before the unexpected object appears for the first time (participants who exceed 100 thresholding trials for IB Motion or 295 thresholding trials for IB Cross). Data from either IB task will be excluded for participants who knew that the unexpected object would appear (they anticipated the unexpected object or anticipated that it was an IB task: i.e. responded yes to the corresponding item on the questionnaire --> IB Motion: first item of the general questionnaire; IB Cross: additional item at the end of the session) **Individual Difference Measures** There are numerous possibilities for each test on how to treat the data and which test scores to use. In the following we will define our exact line of action for each test. 2-Back-Identity - Pr will be used which is defined as Hits minus False Alarms 2-Back-Spatial - Pr will be used which is defined as Hits minus False Alarms OSPAN - OSPAN-Score will be used Flanker - we will use the percent increase in response time to incongruent stimuli over and above the average response time to congruent stimuli: [(incongruent – congruent)/congruent] * 100 - The percent increase measure should cancel out effects of general response speed - Only correct responses are included in the outcome measure. UFOV - We will average across the 3 distances and only count those trials as correct if both the task at fixation and the task in periphery have been solved correctly. Thus, the measure used will be percent correct of all trials in which the subject correctly solved both tasks. Breadth of Attention Test - We will build an attentional-breadth measure by averaging across the vertical threshold and the horizontal threshold (see methods-and-measures node) Navon - we will use the percent increase in response time to local stimuli over and above the average response time to global stimuli: [(local – global)/global] * 100 - The percent increase measure should cancel out effects of general response speed - Only correct responses are included in the outcome measure. Navon-Switchspeed - we will use the percent increase in response time to incongruent stimuli over and above the average response time to congruent stimuli: [(incongruent – congruent)/congruent] * 100 - The percent increase measure should cancel out effects of general response speed - Only correct responses are included in the outcome measure. CFQ - all 32 Items (0 = never to 4 = very often) are added and form a CFQ-Score ---------- Planned Analyses ---------------- We expect the three working memory tests (2-Back-Identity, 2-Back-Spatial and OSPAN) to correlate significantly among each other and the two tests of breadth of attention (UFOV, Breadth of Attention Test) to correlate significantly among each other. If this is the case (i.e. we find significant correlations of r > .3), we will integrate the three working-memory tests into one working-memory measure and the two breadth-of-attention tests into one breadth-of-attention measure. This will be done by z-standardizing all test-scores and then averaging these z-scores. If this is unexpectedly not the case, we will use those individual difference measures that are not correlated with the other measures of their construct as separate predictor variables in the regression analyses detailed below. If noticing rates in IB Motion and IB Cross are correlated significantly (r > .3), we will create a joint measure of noticing by averaging noticing across both IB tasks. We then obtain a comprehensive IB index that includes both a static and a sustained IB task. If this is not the case, we will calculate separate regression analyses for both IB tasks. All analyses are evaluated using an alpha-level of .05. - **Main analyses** For descriptive purposes, we will report correlational matrices (seperated for near and far and collapsed for near and far) with the following variables: IB Motion noticing in no attention trial, IB Motion noticing in divided attention trial, IB Cross noticing in no attention trial, IB Cross noticing in divided attention trial, 2-Back-Identity, 2-Back-Spatial, OSPAN, Flanker, UFOV, Breadth-of-Attention Test, Navon, Navon-Switchspeed, CFQ We will perform logistic regressions seperately for the near and the far condition. IB in the no-attention trial will be the dependend variable. In a first block working memory capacity and breadth of attention will be added to the analysis by the enter method (since they correspond to our main hypothesis). In a second block results from the Navon task and from the CFQ will be added by the enter method. - **Further analyses** We will perform a logistic regression collapsed for the near and the far condition but seperately for IB Motion and IB Cross (We cannot use the joint IB index here since we have distinct hypotheses concerning the two IB tasks.). IB in the no-attention trial will be the dependent variable. Results from the Navon-Switchspeed task and from the Flanker task will be added to the analysis by the enter method. We will correlate our measure of working memory capacity with noticing rates in the divided attention trial collapsed for the near and far conditions. ---------- **Analysis of the relationship between two noticing rates** We will correlate noticing rates in the no-attention trials of the IB Motion and IB Cross.
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.