An Efficient and Naturalistic Experimental Paradigm for Spatiotemporal Assessment of Visual Behavior and Neurophysiology

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Knnll ◽  
Jonathan W. Pillow ◽  
Alexander C. Huk
Kinesiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-279
Author(s):  
Yen-Nan Lin ◽  
Matheus M. Pacheco ◽  
Yaw-Feng Lin ◽  
Chia-Tso Huang ◽  
Ju-Han Lin

To return a serve, one must pick up information from the server’s kinematics and anticipate the ball trajectory. Although the perceptual requirements are important, the literature diverges in terms of the differences between experts and novices as well as the importance of the experimental paradigm (in-situ vs. video-based) for the results. This study aimed to address both concerns. We compared experts’ (n=7, 20.6±1.1 year of age) and novices’ (n=7, 20.0±0.4 years of age) visual pattern when returning a serve (Experiment 1) and the influence of the experimental paradigm in experts (Experiment 2). Experts fixated more and longer the upper body and ball, while novices showed a more distributed pattern and with longer fixations outside of the server’s body. Also, the pattern was different when comparing in-situ and laboratory settings, differing mainly in fixation frequency. The influence of expertise was observed in qualitative (relative) and quantitative (absolute) measures of visual behavior with the setting having an important influence. Thus, studies should be as close to the actual situation if trying to understand experts’ behavior.


2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Schmitz ◽  
Karsten Manske ◽  
Franzis Preckel ◽  
Oliver Wilhelm

Abstract. The Balloon-Analogue Risk Task (BART; Lejuez et al., 2002 ) is one of the most popular behavioral tasks suggested to assess risk-taking in the laboratory. Previous research has shown that the conventionally computed score is predictive, but neglects available information in the data. We suggest a number of alternative scores that are motivated by theories of risk-taking and that exploit more of the available data. These scores can be grouped around (1) risk-taking, (2) task performance, (3) impulsive decision making, and (4) reinforcement sequence modulation. Their theoretical rationale is detailed and their validity is tested within the nomological network of risk-taking, deviance, and scholastic achievement. Two multivariate studies were conducted with youths (n = 435) and with adolescents/young adults (n = 316). Additionally, we tested formal models suggested for the BART that decompose observed behavior into a set of meaningful parameters. A simulation study with parameter recovery was conducted, and the data from the two studies were reanalyzed using the models. Most scores were reliable and differentially predictive of criterion variables and may be used in basic research. However, task specificity and the generally moderate validity do not warrant use of the experimental paradigm for diagnostic purposes.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fawn C. Caplandies ◽  
Ben Colagiuri ◽  
Suzanne G. Helfer ◽  
Andrew L. Geers

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert V. Lindsey ◽  
Michael C. Mozer ◽  
Harold Pashler

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Genevieve M. Heckman ◽  
Robyn S. Kim ◽  
Sherry Lin ◽  
Robert Rauschenberger ◽  
Douglas E. Young ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Tobias Alf Kroll ◽  
A. Alexandre Trindade ◽  
Amber Asikis ◽  
Melissa Salas ◽  
Marcy Lau ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Ergo ◽  
Luna De Vilder ◽  
Esther De Loof ◽  
Tom Verguts

Recent years have witnessed a steady increase in the number of studies investigating the role of reward prediction errors (RPEs) in declarative learning. Specifically, in several experimental paradigms RPEs drive declarative learning; with larger and more positive RPEs enhancing declarative learning. However, it is unknown whether this RPE must derive from the participant’s own response, or whether instead any RPE is sufficient to obtain the learning effect. To test this, we generated RPEs in the same experimental paradigm where we combined an agency and a non-agency condition. We observed no interaction between RPE and agency, suggesting that any RPE (irrespective of its source) can drive declarative learning. This result holds implications for declarative learning theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document