Problems with incorrect response (case 3161)

[jenny]

Hi there,

I had the same problem. Jason suggested that this might be due to the graphics card. Since I could not easily change the graphics card of our lab notebooks my colleague and I tried to find a workaround.

In the attachment you will find a sample IAT demonstrating what we thought might be a managable solution (also for data analysis). Please note that we aimed at an intertrial interval of 150ms for correct and incorrect responses. Therefore, in the style file we used 70ms for the intertrial interval. This means for the correct response: 70ms for the first trial, 70ms for the jump to the blank screen and 10ms for the duration of the blank screen. For the incorrect response, we add the remaining time (80ms) as a blank screen to complete 150ms.

For data analysis one will need the log-file in which both rt for the incorrect responses are stored. These rt need to be aggregated in order to derive at the rt until correct response is made. This should be easy since both rt are stored with the same trial number.

We hope this makes sense and helps.

Jenny & Kevin

[margevich]

Hello,

I'm also having this problem with my incorrect.txt only displaying (if at all) after I have corrected my response in a Lexical Decision Task when run on one of two laptops (but NOT desktops). One laptop has version 2012, and one has version 2014, and the issue occurs on both. The same issue occurs when I try to run the sample DirectRT incorrect response file, so it is not specific to my LDT program and appears to be a more general, laptop specific issue. Has a viable solution been developed yet? Please help!

Best,
Alex

[jason_reed]

Alex,

Please send a copy of your computers' dxdiag report to support@empirisoft.com. Click on the Start button, type dxidag into the Search box, run the dxdiag.exe application, and save a copy of the dxdiag.txt report to send to me. Please be sure to label each report as to whether or not the computer has a problem with the incorrect.txt feature. Please also reference case 3161 in the email.