search

kristabh / gaze-following-analysis

Multi-lab infant gaze following project
MIT License
2 stars 0 forks source link

Latency to be validated in variable_validation #23

Closed kristabh closed 5 years ago

kristabh commented 5 years ago

Check when labs began counting latencies. Are values as expected?

AlexisBlack2g commented 5 years ago

I'm a bit confused about the instructions for latency. According to RR: "On each trial, latency was coded as the latency of the first face-to-object shift, such that each infant had a value on each trial for latency to look at both the congruent and incongruent AOIs. " I would interpret this to mean that each trial should report a latency to both the congruent and incongruent stimulus. I don't think this is the case, though - right? What we're seeing is the latency to the first shift (and whether that was in/congruent)?

kristabh commented 5 years ago

Yes, I think you're right and unfortunately this is an error in the RR. I've changed the wording now (tracked) on the post-registration version for editing.

AlexisBlack2g commented 5 years ago

Since we are already discussing the coding of latency with Manitoba and Western Sydney, I reached out about the two trials with very long latencies in these two datasets (one 4165000 - looks like a misplaced decimal in original file; the other 63032310 - less clear what happened here).

kristabh commented 5 years ago

@AlexisBlack2g Did these values ever get changed in the data?

AlexisBlack2g commented 5 years ago

being tackled by Jessica Hay

kristabh commented 5 years ago

Closing and moving discussion of babylab_western_sydney to a new issue