Cargando…

Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks

Research often conceptualises complex social factors as being distinct binary categories (e.g., female vs male, feminine vs masculine). While this can be appropriate, the addition of an ‘overlapping’ category (e.g., non-binary, gender neutral) can contextualise the ‘binary’, both for participants (a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Öttl, Anton, Kim, Jonathan D., Behne, Dawn M., Gygax, Pascal, Hyönä, Jukka, Gabriel, Ute
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10016697/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36920982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281377
_version_ 1784907458127331328
author Öttl, Anton
Kim, Jonathan D.
Behne, Dawn M.
Gygax, Pascal
Hyönä, Jukka
Gabriel, Ute
author_facet Öttl, Anton
Kim, Jonathan D.
Behne, Dawn M.
Gygax, Pascal
Hyönä, Jukka
Gabriel, Ute
author_sort Öttl, Anton
collection PubMed
description Research often conceptualises complex social factors as being distinct binary categories (e.g., female vs male, feminine vs masculine). While this can be appropriate, the addition of an ‘overlapping’ category (e.g., non-binary, gender neutral) can contextualise the ‘binary’, both for participants (allowing more complex conceptualisations of the categories than the ‘either/or’ conceptualisation in binary tasks), and for the results (by providing a neutral baseline for comparison). However, it is not clear what the best response setup for such a task would be. In this study, we explore this topic through comparing a unimanual (N = 34) and a bimanual response setup (N = 32) for use with a three-alternative choice response time task. Crucially, one of the stimulus categories (‘mixed’) was composed of stimulus elements from the other two stimulus categories used in that task (Complex Task). A reference button task was included to isolate the motoric component of response registration (Simple Task). The results of the simple task indicated lower motoric costs for the unimanual compared to the bimanual setup. However, when statistically controlling for these motoric costs in the complex task, the bimanual setup had a lower error rate and faster response times than the unimanual setup. Further, in the complex task error rates and response times were higher for the mixed than the matched stimuli, indicating that responding to mixed stimuli is more challenging for encoding and/or decision making processes. This difference was more pronounced in the unimanual than the bimanual setup. Taken together these results indicate that the unimanual setup is more adequate for the reference button task, whereas the intricacy of overlapping categories in the complex task is better contained in the bimanual setup, i.e. when some response alternatives are allocated to one hand and other alternatives to the other hand.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10016697
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100166972023-03-16 Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks Öttl, Anton Kim, Jonathan D. Behne, Dawn M. Gygax, Pascal Hyönä, Jukka Gabriel, Ute PLoS One Research Article Research often conceptualises complex social factors as being distinct binary categories (e.g., female vs male, feminine vs masculine). While this can be appropriate, the addition of an ‘overlapping’ category (e.g., non-binary, gender neutral) can contextualise the ‘binary’, both for participants (allowing more complex conceptualisations of the categories than the ‘either/or’ conceptualisation in binary tasks), and for the results (by providing a neutral baseline for comparison). However, it is not clear what the best response setup for such a task would be. In this study, we explore this topic through comparing a unimanual (N = 34) and a bimanual response setup (N = 32) for use with a three-alternative choice response time task. Crucially, one of the stimulus categories (‘mixed’) was composed of stimulus elements from the other two stimulus categories used in that task (Complex Task). A reference button task was included to isolate the motoric component of response registration (Simple Task). The results of the simple task indicated lower motoric costs for the unimanual compared to the bimanual setup. However, when statistically controlling for these motoric costs in the complex task, the bimanual setup had a lower error rate and faster response times than the unimanual setup. Further, in the complex task error rates and response times were higher for the mixed than the matched stimuli, indicating that responding to mixed stimuli is more challenging for encoding and/or decision making processes. This difference was more pronounced in the unimanual than the bimanual setup. Taken together these results indicate that the unimanual setup is more adequate for the reference button task, whereas the intricacy of overlapping categories in the complex task is better contained in the bimanual setup, i.e. when some response alternatives are allocated to one hand and other alternatives to the other hand. Public Library of Science 2023-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC10016697/ /pubmed/36920982 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281377 Text en © 2023 Öttl et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Öttl, Anton
Kim, Jonathan D.
Behne, Dawn M.
Gygax, Pascal
Hyönä, Jukka
Gabriel, Ute
Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks
title Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks
title_full Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks
title_fullStr Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks
title_full_unstemmed Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks
title_short Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks
title_sort exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10016697/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36920982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281377
work_keys_str_mv AT ottlanton exploringthecomparativeadequacyofaunimanualandabimanualstimulusresponsesetupforusewiththreealternativechoiceresponsetimetasks
AT kimjonathand exploringthecomparativeadequacyofaunimanualandabimanualstimulusresponsesetupforusewiththreealternativechoiceresponsetimetasks
AT behnedawnm exploringthecomparativeadequacyofaunimanualandabimanualstimulusresponsesetupforusewiththreealternativechoiceresponsetimetasks
AT gygaxpascal exploringthecomparativeadequacyofaunimanualandabimanualstimulusresponsesetupforusewiththreealternativechoiceresponsetimetasks
AT hyonajukka exploringthecomparativeadequacyofaunimanualandabimanualstimulusresponsesetupforusewiththreealternativechoiceresponsetimetasks
AT gabrielute exploringthecomparativeadequacyofaunimanualandabimanualstimulusresponsesetupforusewiththreealternativechoiceresponsetimetasks