| Title |
Online psychophysics: reaction time effects in cognitive experiments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-016-0783-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kilian Semmelmann, Sarah Weigelt |
| Abstract |
Using the Internet to acquire behavioral data is currently on the rise. However, very basic questions regarding the feasibility of online psychophysics are still open. Here, we aimed to replicate five well-known paradigms in experimental psychology (Stroop, Flanker, visual search, masked priming, attentional blink) in three settings (classical "lab", "web-in-lab", "web") to account for possible changes in technology and environment. Lab and web-in-lab data were both acquired in an in-lab setting with lab using "Gold Standard" methods, while web-in-lab used web technology. This allowed for a direct comparison of potential differences in acquisition software. To account for additional environmental differences, the web technology experiments were published online to participate from home (setting web), thereby keeping the software and experimental design identical and only changing the environmental setting. Our main results are: First, we found an expected fixed additive timing offset when using web technology (M = 37 ms, SD = 8.14) and recording online (M = 87 ms, SD = 16.04) in comparison to lab data. Second, all task-specific effects were reproduced except for the priming paradigm, which couldn't be replicated in any setting. Third, there were no differences in error rates, which are independent of the timing offset. This finding further supports the assumption of data equality over all settings. Fourth, we found that browser type might be influencing absolute reaction times. Together, these results contribute to the slowly but steadily growing literature that online psychophysics is a suitable complement - or even substitute - to lab data acquisition. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 148 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 21% |
| Researcher | 22 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 14% |
| Unknown | 29 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 77 | 52% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 3% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Unknown | 31 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#8,185,927
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#993
of 2,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,621
of 381,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#21
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,575 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.