评估在线行为侧性电池的可靠性:一项预先注册的研究。

IF 0.9 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Laterality Pub Date : 2021-07-01 Epub Date: 2020-12-15 DOI:10.1080/1357650X.2020.1859526
Adam J Parker, Zoe V J Woodhead, Paul A Thompson, Dorothy V M Bishop
{"title":"评估在线行为侧性电池的可靠性:一项预先注册的研究。","authors":"Adam J Parker,&nbsp;Zoe V J Woodhead,&nbsp;Paul A Thompson,&nbsp;Dorothy V M Bishop","doi":"10.1080/1357650X.2020.1859526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Studies of cerebral lateralization often involve participants completing a series of perceptual tasks under laboratory conditions. This has constrained the number of participants recruited in such studies. Online testing can allow for much larger sample sizes but limits the amount of experimental control that is feasible. Here we considered whether online testing could give valid and reliable results on four tasks: a rhyme decision visual half-field task, a dichotic listening task, a chimeric faces task, and a finger tapping task. We recruited 392 participants, oversampling left-handers, who completed the battery twice. Three of the tasks showed evidence of both validity and reliability, insofar as they showed hemispheric advantages in the expected direction and test-retest reliability of at least <i>r</i> = .75. The reliability of the rhyme decision task was less satisfactory (<i>r</i> = .62). We also confirmed a prediction that extreme left-handers were more likely to depart from typical lateralization. Lateralization across the two language tasks (dichotic listening and rhyme judgement) was weakly correlated, but unrelated to lateralization on the chimeric faces task. We conclude that three of the tasks, dichotic listening, chimeric faces and finger tapping, show considerable promise for online evaluation of cerebral lateralization.</p>","PeriodicalId":47387,"journal":{"name":"Laterality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1357650X.2020.1859526","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the reliability of an online behavioural laterality battery: A pre-registered study.\",\"authors\":\"Adam J Parker,&nbsp;Zoe V J Woodhead,&nbsp;Paul A Thompson,&nbsp;Dorothy V M Bishop\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1357650X.2020.1859526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Studies of cerebral lateralization often involve participants completing a series of perceptual tasks under laboratory conditions. This has constrained the number of participants recruited in such studies. Online testing can allow for much larger sample sizes but limits the amount of experimental control that is feasible. Here we considered whether online testing could give valid and reliable results on four tasks: a rhyme decision visual half-field task, a dichotic listening task, a chimeric faces task, and a finger tapping task. We recruited 392 participants, oversampling left-handers, who completed the battery twice. Three of the tasks showed evidence of both validity and reliability, insofar as they showed hemispheric advantages in the expected direction and test-retest reliability of at least <i>r</i> = .75. The reliability of the rhyme decision task was less satisfactory (<i>r</i> = .62). We also confirmed a prediction that extreme left-handers were more likely to depart from typical lateralization. Lateralization across the two language tasks (dichotic listening and rhyme judgement) was weakly correlated, but unrelated to lateralization on the chimeric faces task. We conclude that three of the tasks, dichotic listening, chimeric faces and finger tapping, show considerable promise for online evaluation of cerebral lateralization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laterality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1357650X.2020.1859526\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laterality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2020.1859526\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/12/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laterality","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2020.1859526","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

大脑侧化的研究通常需要参与者在实验室条件下完成一系列感知任务。这限制了在这类研究中招募的参与者数量。在线测试可以允许更大的样本量,但限制了可行的实验控制量。在这里,我们考虑了在线测试是否可以在四个任务上给出有效和可靠的结果:押韵决策视觉半场任务、二分听任务、嵌合面孔任务和手指敲击任务。我们招募了392名参与者,对左撇子进行过采样,他们完成了两次电池测试。其中三个任务显示了效度和信度的证据,因为它们在预期方向上显示了半球优势,并且重测信度至少为r = 0.75。韵律决策任务的信度较差(r = 0.62)。我们还证实了一个预测,即极端左撇子更有可能偏离典型的偏侧化。两种语言任务(二分听和押韵判断)的偏侧化与嵌合面孔任务的偏侧化弱相关,但与之无关。我们的结论是,三个任务,二分聆听,嵌合面孔和手指敲击,显示出相当大的前景,为在线评估大脑侧化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing the reliability of an online behavioural laterality battery: A pre-registered study.

Studies of cerebral lateralization often involve participants completing a series of perceptual tasks under laboratory conditions. This has constrained the number of participants recruited in such studies. Online testing can allow for much larger sample sizes but limits the amount of experimental control that is feasible. Here we considered whether online testing could give valid and reliable results on four tasks: a rhyme decision visual half-field task, a dichotic listening task, a chimeric faces task, and a finger tapping task. We recruited 392 participants, oversampling left-handers, who completed the battery twice. Three of the tasks showed evidence of both validity and reliability, insofar as they showed hemispheric advantages in the expected direction and test-retest reliability of at least r = .75. The reliability of the rhyme decision task was less satisfactory (r = .62). We also confirmed a prediction that extreme left-handers were more likely to depart from typical lateralization. Lateralization across the two language tasks (dichotic listening and rhyme judgement) was weakly correlated, but unrelated to lateralization on the chimeric faces task. We conclude that three of the tasks, dichotic listening, chimeric faces and finger tapping, show considerable promise for online evaluation of cerebral lateralization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Laterality
Laterality Multiple-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition publishes high quality research on all aspects of lateralisation in humans and non-human species. Laterality"s principal interest is in the psychological, behavioural and neurological correlates of lateralisation. The editors will also consider accessible papers from any discipline which can illuminate the general problems of the evolution of biological and neural asymmetry, papers on the cultural, linguistic, artistic and social consequences of lateral asymmetry, and papers on its historical origins and development. The interests of workers in laterality are typically broad.
期刊最新文献
Artistic turns: laterality in paintings of kisses and embraces A task-dependent analysis of closed vs. open and fine vs. gross motor skills in handedness. Fear is more right lateralized than happiness and anger: Evidence for the motivational hypothesis of emotional face perception? Footedness in merlins: Raptors perching in a cold climate. Hemispheric engagement during the processing of affective adjectives-an ERP divided visual field study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1