Uncued trials are faster in pure-block design (#133)

Return to View Chart

How to Cite this Report

APA Style

Søren K. Andersen. Uncued trials are faster in pure-block design. (2012, October 09). Retrieved 09:38, July 22, 2017 from http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTMz

MLA Style

"Uncued trials are faster in pure-block design" Søren K. Andersen. 09 Oct 2012 17:56 22 Jul 2017, 09:38 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTMz>

MHRA Style

'Uncued trials are faster in pure-block design', Søren K. Andersen, , 09 October 2012 17:56 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTMz> [accessed 22 July 2017]

Chicago Style

"Uncued trials are faster in pure-block design", Søren K. Andersen, , http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTMz (accessed July 22, 2017)

CBE/CSE Style

Uncued trials are faster in pure-block design [Internet]. Søren K. Andersen; 2012 Oct 09, 17:56 [cited 2017 Jul 22]. Available from: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTMz

Reference to Original Report of Finding Jaffard, M., Benraiss, A., Longcamp, M., Velay, J.-L., Boulinguez, P. (2007). Cueing method biases in visual detection studies. Brain Research 1179, 106-118
Title Uncued trials are faster in pure-block design
If the original article contained multiple experiments, which one did you attempt to replicate? e.g., you might respond 'Study 1' or 'Experiment 4'. Experiment 1a
Link to PDF of Original ReportView Article
Brief Statement of Original Result The effect of alerting cues was compared between mixed and pure blocks (i.e. when cued and uncued trials were presented interleaved or separately). Reaction times (RTs) to uncued stimuli were faster in pure blocks.
Type of Replication Attempted Fairly Direct Replication
Result Type Successful Replication
Difference? Same Direction, 0.00000000
Number of Subjects 196
Number of Subjects in Original Study 12
Year in which Replication Attempt was Made 2007
Name of Investigators (Real Names Required) Søren K. Andersen
Detailed Description of Method/Results The study was replicated in independent samples in 3 subsequent years. As in the original study (see Figs 1 &2), RTs to uncued stimuli were much faster in pure blocks, while RTs to cued stimuli were comparable for pure and mixed blocks. Two main differences between our replications and the original were observed: 1) overall RTs were about ~100ms slower 2) there was still a difference between cued and uncued stimuli in mixed blocks at an SOA of 100ms (resembling the 200ms SOA condition of the original study).
These two differences are possibly related: since participants responded on average 100ms slower in our experiments, the time between cue and response in the 100ms SOA in our data was comparable to the time between cue and response in the 200ms SOA in the original data. This suggests that the time between cue and response rather than the SOA (time between cue and stimulus) might be more relevant for the timecourse of RTs in cued trials.
The most likely explanation for these differences are the suboptimal conditions during our experiments (see below).
Any Known Methodological Differences
(between original and present study)?
experiment was much shorter: only 10 SOAs in 2007, 8 SOAs in 2008 and 2009, only nine trials per SOA (4 left, 4 right, 1 catch trial). Total number of trials: 360 (2007), 288 (2008&2009) less training: 4 blocks of 20 (2007) or 16 (2008&2009) trials each subpotimal conditions: groups of 20-30 participants performed the experiment in parallel in the department's computer room (more distraction, possibly less motivation, precise control of viewing conditions not possible)
Email of Investigator
Name of individuals who
actually carried out the project
S.K.Andersen
Location of ProjectUniversity of Leipzig, Department of Psychology
Characteristics of Subjects
(subject pool, paid, etc.)
Other
All undergraduate psychology students of the 3rd semester
Where did these subjects reside?Germany
Was this a Class Project?No
Further Details of Results as pdf
Additional Comments
Email of Original Investigator
Quantitive Information
I have complied with ethical standards for experimentation on human beings and, if necessary, have obtained appropriate permission from an Institutional Review Board or other oversight group.
TAG: Attention TAG: JDM TAG: Language TAG: Learning TAG: Memory TAG: Perception TAG: Performance TAG: Problem Solving TAG: Social Cognition TAG: Social Psychology TAG: Thinking

Are you posting an unpublished replication attempt that you conducted yourself, or noting a published replication attempt?

Post Unpublished
Post Published