Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
45 lines (32 loc) · 1.88 KB

README.md

File metadata and controls

45 lines (32 loc) · 1.88 KB
Raw

Phonological Similarity in Complex Span

Overview of Experiments

E1 to E3 correspond order-wise to the experiments in the McNamara, Moore, & Conway (2011).

  • E1 - Simple word span, complex reading span, and complex reading span with TBR-words as last item in sentence.
  • E2 - Long and short versions of reading span. Short corresponds to first complex reading span in E1. Long was used in Copeland and Radvansky.
  • E3 - Reading span manipulating phonemic overlap instead of rhyming. (should there also be word span data for this experiment?)
  • E4 - Regular OSPAN.
  • E7 - (A) Reading span (same as short RSPAN in E1 and E2) with words randomly shuffled within each sentence. (B) Spelled-out OSPAN (no processing component)
  • E9 - Pooled word span.
  • E10 - Ospan with scrambled, spelled-out words (no verification).
  • E11 - Long and short names as distractor items.

Processing and Summary Scripts

Scripts for processing / analysis can be found on github

Each folder has a data sub-folder with the unprocessed experimental files. Where applicable, I exported the e-merge files to tab-seperated .txt files, generally labeled output.txt.

A single script (0\_processing.py) preprocesses these output files, and saves the results as data/scored_all.csv.
This can then be fed to subsequent analyses. So, E-merge => tab-seperated => 0_processing.py => 1_...

Some complex span tasks for these experiments have identical structures / labels. They were preprocessed in the same way:

E2, E4, E6, E7, (E8 to E11?)..

Other experiments had to be preprocessed seperately. See 0_preprocess.py for details.

Complete E-dat files for: E2, E4, E6, E7, E8, E9, E10, E11

Missing in Brooke's data..

  • E1 - RT's?
  • E3 - Only have recall data
  • E5 - Only have recall data