Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Supported by

Problem with logging

Hi, I'm having trouble with logging the responses from part of my experiment.

In the task, the participants are asked to respond with their right hand when the stimulus is present in an array and with their left hand when it is absent.

In a second block of trials, the responses are inverted: left = present and right = absent.

Everything is fine in the first block as all the responses are correctly logged into the log file. The problem arises with the sconde block because the responses are nowhere to be found!

I'm using the same logger (linked copies) from one block to another.

I feel like I'm missing something very basic here.

• Thanks for your interest in OpenSesame and welcome to the forum. :)

Could you upload your experiment here? Then we can have a closer look at the logging problem you are describing for the second half of your experiment.

Cheers,

Lotje

Did you like my answer? Feel free to

• Hello @lvanderlinden,

Thank you very much for attempting to answer my question.

I've slightly changed the plan. I figured it would work better if I used conditional statements which determine what the correct response chould be considered as.

But this brings a new problem. I would like my experiment to have the following structure:

1. Instructions and practice.

2. A bloc with right ctrl as the correct response to the presence of the stimulus and left ctrl as the correct response to the absence of the stimulus.

3. Instructions for the second bloc and practice. The second bloc is the same as the first one but with the correct response keys inversed.

4.The aformentioned second bloc.

The way the sequence is set up is a bit funny because my experiment is a bit complexe. I need to alternate between two similar tasks. And to do so, I have prepared 4 trials of each and shuffled them in such a way that their order is counterbalanced while still alternating.

Now here is the problem:

I would like to bring up each trial twice per bloc for a total of 16 trials per bloc and have the new intstructions and practice run appear befor the second bloc.

But the loop named "EXPERIMENT_LOOP" seems to only allow for the 8 trials to appear once, followed by the new instructions and practice. I can't figure out why this is!

I hope all of this makes sense!

I'll append my experiment to this reply so that you can have a better idea of what I'm trying to accomplish.

• Hi,

Yes, you are right, your experiment looks very complex indeed :)

Honestly, I don't see myself understanding what you are trying to do and finding the problem in it based on this massive structure. Perhaps, you could try to explain the essential elements of your design in a clear way and we can think about whether there is a way to implement it in a more concise and clear way?

So, what I understand so far is that you have two different tasks that you want to alternate. Are these tasks very different, or virtually the same except minor difference, e.g. the response-key mapping?

Thanks,

Eduard

• I had a look at your experiment and it indeed seems overly complicated. I think you could make more use of the GUI, nested `loop`-`sequence` structures and the `square-bracket` syntax.

I attached an example script where I tried to do this. Note that:

• Left and right control presses are recorded by the `keyboard_response` item as LCTRL (or lctrl) and RCTRL (or rctrl) respectively. Giving the variable "correct_response" the variables "left control" and "right control" might therefore not work (although I didn't try).
• I called the SAARC task "single task" (and assumed that this functions as the practice phase)
• And I called the SPoARC task "dual task (and assumed that this functions as the experimental phase)
• I gave the incorrect WM_series random values, feel free to change them
• There might be some errors in my version of the experiment due to sloppiness from my side, so please check carefully

I hope the attached script makes sense to you. I might add some more detailed explanations here later, if I have time. :)

Cheers,

Lotje

Did you like my answer? Feel free to