Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
The learning criterion was 14 or more correct trials in a 20-trial session.
Similar(59)
Relative to controls, ASD participants: (i) made more antisaccade errors and responded more quickly on correct trials; (ii) showed reduced discrimination between error and correct responses in rostral ACC (rACC), which was primarily due to (iii) abnormally increased activation on correct trials and (iv) showed reduced FA in WM underlying ACC.
Only data from rats that consistently performed more than 80 correct trials per session were included.
The specific ratio between matching and non-matching trials was chosen in order to prevent that participants subjectively perceive incorrect trials more rarely than correct trials.
In spite of making more errors, ASD participants responded more quickly than controls on correct trials suggesting a disruption in the speed-accuracy trade-off.
Sequences of correct trials are more likely when the animal is more engaged in the task, perhaps due to attentional or motivational states.
Beta15-35 Hz, low gamma35-55 Hz, and high gamma65-90 Hz coherent principal cells exhibited this preferential coherence during Correct Trials Only more often than theta4-12 Hz coherent principal cells, which consisted of a larger proportion of cells that were coherent irrespective of trial outcome.
Indeed, the animal received larger rewards only after sequences of correct trials, which are more likely when the animal is more engaged.
If the dynamics mark knowledge, one would predict that the diminishing of action dynamics over correct trials should be more substantial compared to incorrect trials, for which there was likely more uncertainty.
Although both schizophrenia and ASD samples made more antisaccade errors than controls, ASD participants performed correct trials faster and schizophrenia patients performed more slowly.
Controls showed a more differentiated response to error versus correct trials than ASD participants in the right rACC, extending into the dACC (Fig. 3A, Table 2).
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