Cargando…

Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis

The number of possible approaches to conducting and analyzing a research study—often referred to as researcher degrees of freedom—has been increasingly under scrutiny as a challenge to the reproducibility of experimental results. Here we focus on the specific instance of time window selection for ti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peelle, Jonathan E., Van Engen, Kristin J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8752058/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35024541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/collabra.25961
_version_ 1784631812926996480
author Peelle, Jonathan E.
Van Engen, Kristin J.
author_facet Peelle, Jonathan E.
Van Engen, Kristin J.
author_sort Peelle, Jonathan E.
collection PubMed
description The number of possible approaches to conducting and analyzing a research study—often referred to as researcher degrees of freedom—has been increasingly under scrutiny as a challenge to the reproducibility of experimental results. Here we focus on the specific instance of time window selection for time series data. As an example, we use data from a visual world eye tracking paradigm in which participants heard a word and were instructed to click on one of four pictures corresponding to the target (e.g., “Click on the hat”). We examined statistical models for a range of start times following the beginning of the carrier phrase, and for each start time a range of window lengths, resulting in 8281 unique time windows. For each time window we ran the same logistic linear mixed effects model, including effects of time, age, noise, and word frequency on an orthogonalized polynomial basis set. Comparing results across these time ranges shows substantial changes in both parameter estimates and p values, even within intuitively “reasonable” boundaries. In some cases varying the window selection in the range of 100–200 ms caused parameter estimates to change from positive to negative. Rather than rush to provide specific recommendations for time window selection (which differs across studies), we advocate for transparency regarding time window selection and awareness of the effects this choice may have on results. Preregistration and multiverse model exploration are two complementary strategies to help mitigate bias introduced by any particular time window choice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8752058
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87520582022-01-11 Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis Peelle, Jonathan E. Van Engen, Kristin J. Collabra Psychol Article The number of possible approaches to conducting and analyzing a research study—often referred to as researcher degrees of freedom—has been increasingly under scrutiny as a challenge to the reproducibility of experimental results. Here we focus on the specific instance of time window selection for time series data. As an example, we use data from a visual world eye tracking paradigm in which participants heard a word and were instructed to click on one of four pictures corresponding to the target (e.g., “Click on the hat”). We examined statistical models for a range of start times following the beginning of the carrier phrase, and for each start time a range of window lengths, resulting in 8281 unique time windows. For each time window we ran the same logistic linear mixed effects model, including effects of time, age, noise, and word frequency on an orthogonalized polynomial basis set. Comparing results across these time ranges shows substantial changes in both parameter estimates and p values, even within intuitively “reasonable” boundaries. In some cases varying the window selection in the range of 100–200 ms caused parameter estimates to change from positive to negative. Rather than rush to provide specific recommendations for time window selection (which differs across studies), we advocate for transparency regarding time window selection and awareness of the effects this choice may have on results. Preregistration and multiverse model exploration are two complementary strategies to help mitigate bias introduced by any particular time window choice. 2021 2021-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8752058/ /pubmed/35024541 http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/collabra.25961 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) for more information.
spellingShingle Article
Peelle, Jonathan E.
Van Engen, Kristin J.
Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis
title Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis
title_full Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis
title_fullStr Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis
title_short Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis
title_sort time stand still: effects of temporal window selection on eye tracking analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8752058/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35024541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/collabra.25961
work_keys_str_mv AT peellejonathane timestandstilleffectsoftemporalwindowselectiononeyetrackinganalysis
AT vanengenkristinj timestandstilleffectsoftemporalwindowselectiononeyetrackinganalysis