We conduct experiments in this configuration for all four subjects and in the two tasks: high-level locomotion (Table 7) and mid-level gestures (Table 8).
The rest period and the two task periods were set as the within-subject factor (time) and the three groups were set as the between-subject factor.
However, the observed differences in the chronometric and psychometric curves reflected subtle differences in RTs and accuracy between the two tasks.
ERPs to mismatches in both tasks elicited a negativity around 400 ms, which was similar in latency and amplitude in the two tasks, but differed in scalp topography.
Here, we focus on the rat brain following stroke or seizures, and demonstrate how the two tasks can be approached simultaneously.
Two potential alternate explanations for the activation differences between the polyrhythmic and isorhythmic movements relate to differences in difficulty and attentional demands between the two tasks.
The results support the prediction and show marked differences between the two tasks in how the locations and features of task-relevant and -irrelevant elements are remembered.
A GLM repeated measures procedure indicated that scores and growth rates on the two tasks were affected by hearing status.
Participants always begun with the subtraction task, and then alternated between the two tasks.
The discovery that these two tasks share a common mechanism would be surprising and informative, suggesting that the two tasks rely on common psychological component process.
