Alternative to response counters for selection from lists with fixed reward/loss?

[KKat]

Thank you so much! It works fine now. I really appreciate it :)
k.

On Jun 3, 8:59 am, liwenna <liwe... at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey!
>
> I couldn't let go of it and got another solution. I made a screenshot
> of it which can be found here: [img]http://images.redial.net/kkat.bmp[/
> img]
>
> It's basically a rearrangement of the experiment that you have already
> with a few elements copied and a couple of elements added. What it
> does: it starts the experiment and a trial and then based on the
> answer given it continues to load either one of the decklists. For
> this the 'procedure' for each trial had to be split in two: the start
> of the trialproc is just as it was allready, and everything that was
> happening AFTER the answer is given is now moved to a separate
> procedure called 'restproc'. (which, I realise now, makes sense in
> dutch but not in english >.< rename it to somethign that's convenient
> to you).  I realise that the whole thing looks rather messy on the
> screenshot but it will make sense if you rebuild it. (again: i'd send
> you the file but it won't work as I am in e-prime 2 and you're on 1).
>
> The inline called respchoosedeck makes the program skip to one of four
> labels based on the response given (labelrespA - labelrespD). These
> labels are placed on the trialproc and each label is followed by it's
> corresponding decklist. Still on the trialproc each of the decklists
> is followed by another piece of inline that tells the program to skip
> to the end of the trialproc (to endlabel) if that inline is
> encountered.
>
> Let's move to the next level: inside each of the four decklists you
> should nest a new proc (restproc in my case, call it what you like),
> and place the inline called "choose1234"and the slide called "FB" on
> this proc. Make all the levels of all the four decklists refer to this
> very same  'restproc' .
>
> The last pivotal setting is to change the sampling criteria on each of
> the decklists: a cycle should be all 100 samples, yet the list must be
> exited after 1 sample (and selection stays sequential).  Now you're
> set!
>
> The only drawback is that your errorbar does no longer seem to work,
> but that might also be due to something else that I tried before
> founding this solution... I didn't notice when it stopped working.
>
> Let me know how this works for you!
>
> AW
>
> On Jun 2, 9:54 pm, KKat <kathy.smolew... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear members:
>
> > I posted a few weeks ago with regard to a modified version of the Iowa
> > Gambling Task that I was working on and I received great initial
> > advice from a fellow member on how to use nested lists to achieve my
> > goal of selecting from four different lists on each trial. However, I
> > now have another problem, so here it goes....
>
> > Currently, I have a List object (named DesignList) which consists of
> > one row and the following under the Nested column: DeckA, DeckB,
> > DeckC, Deck D.
>
> > It looks like this:
>
> > ID    Weight     Procedure
> > Nested                                    Attributes.....
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 1         1          TrialProc     DeckA,DeckB,DeckC,DeckD
>
> > Then, I have four separate lists (DeckA, DeckB, DeckC, DeckD) created
> > under the DesignList.
> > Each of these lists has the same structure, which looks like this:
>
> > DeckA:
>
> > ID    Weight     varwin1      varloss1
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 1         1          +100            0
> > 2         1          +100            0
> > 3         1          +100            -150
> > etc.
>
> > DeckB:
> > ID    Weight     varwin2      varloss2
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 1         1          +100            0
> > :          1          +100            0
> > 10        1          +100         -1250
> > etc.
>
> > I am able to sample each list (i.e., the program is selecting from the
> > correct list and all lists work) and the task works ok as it's coded.
> > However, it's not doing what I need it to do. In this task, it is
> > imperative that the
> > losses/rewards in each deck are presented in a specific, non-random
> > order so that the experimenter can assess for sensitivity to reward
> > and punishment, as well as reinforcement learning.
>
> > Although the sampling is set to "sequential" for each list, it does
> > not start on ID_1 for each deck --- for example, if I start selecting
> > from DeckA and then move to DeckB for the second trial, it selects the
> > [varwin2] and
> > [varloss2] values from row ID_2; if I then select DeckD, it selects
> > the [varwin4] and [varloss4] from row ID_3.
>
> > I would like the sampling for each deck to be independent from the
> > others - the program should refer to row ID_1, then ID_2, then ID_3
> > and so forth from EACH deck. In other words, the wins/losses should be
> > fixed (i.e., if any participant chooses DeckX for the third time, they
> > will all win/lose the same amount).
>
> > I have been informed that when using nested lists, e-prime can only
> > select one level from each list for each trial and  cannot select one
> > of the lists based on the answer given. This means that for trial 1
> > the four first levels of the four deck-lists are all four loaded by e-
> > prime and based on the answer one of them is 'shown' to the subject.
> > Because all four first levels are loaded e-prime will load the four
> > second levels for the next trial etc. This means that a level for, for
> > instance, deck B is 'used' whether or not the subject chooses this
> > deck.
>
> > Instead, it was suggested to me that I should delete the lists and
> > code the wins/losses using response counters. My understanding is that
> > I would would need to declare variables that count each response given
> > (for instance 'respbcounter' counts how  often the response is b).
> > Then, based on the respbcounter, the win/loss is
> >  determined for a trial (if respbcounter is 8 then varwin2  = +100 and
> > varloss2 = -0;  if respbcounter is 9 then varwin2 = +100 and varloss2
> > = -1250). I would have to do the same for the three other decks.
>
> > I have never used response counters or nested lists before this task -
> > can anyone confirm whether or not response counters will solve my
> > problem?? Or, does anyone have any other suggestions?
> > Thank you!
> > Kathy
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "E-Prime" group.
To post to this group, send email to e-prime at googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to e-prime+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/e-prime?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---