Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Click stimuli (duration: 100 milliseconds) were presented with ER3A insert earphones at the maximum level of 90 dB HL at a rate of 21.1/s with rarefaction and condensation polarity.
Similar(59)
In each session, all combinations of discriminability level (1, 3, 5 pixels longer to the left or right), reward (left- or rightward arrow) and delay condition ("go" cue occurring
To make sure that any observed semantic activation took place during the early stage of lexical access, the visual targets were presented 100 milliseconds before the offsets of the ambiguous prime words (Ahrens 1998; Tabossi and Zardon 1993).
Afterward, the 120-dB pulse alone, prepulse/pulse pairings of 4, 8 or 16 dB above 70-dB background followed by the 120-dB pulse with a 100-millisecond delay or no stimulus were presented in pseudorandom order.
When the visual stimuli were presented for 1500 milliseconds (Ahrens 2006), selective access has been observed.
The sound of the movie (background noise) and the 650 Hz, 75 dB, 520 millisecond tones (the CS: conditioned stimulus) were presented bilaterally through the headphones.
Calibrated stimuli were presented as free-field clicks (0.01 milliseconds duration) and tone pips (3, 6, 18, 24, 30, 36 and 42 kHz of 5 milliseconds duration, 1 milliseconds rise/fall time) over a range of intensity levels of 10- 100 dB sound pressure level in 3 dB steps.
The 48 experimental trials were presented in random orders with an inter-trial interval of 2000 milliseconds.
Subjects were presented with 50 faces for 2 seconds each with a 500-millisecond blank screen between faces.
Non-probe stimuli were presented for 1000 ms followed by a fixation cross which varied in duration from 900 2300 milliseconds (mean duration 1500 ms).
In these paired trials, the 20 millisecond air puff was presented with a 500-millisecond delay after onset of the 520 millisecond tone, so the two stimuli ended simultaneously (delay eyeblink conditioning, see Fig. 1).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com