Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(37)
Therefore, the novel stimulus test was considered the more accurate evaluation of reactivity.
Two types of tests were done, a (MUlti Stimulus test with Hidden Reference and Anchor) MUSHRA test [17] and a (Comparative Mean Opinion Score) CMOS test [18].
Preferences for the auralizations were compared using a modified version of the MUlti Stimulus test with Hidden Reference and Anchor, MUSHRA (ITU-R BS.1534-1).
In the related work, Loke et al. [23] have used impairment scaling with DSIS method variant II and Seshadrinathan et al. [24] have used continuous MOS scaling in a single stimulus test arrangement.
Subjective emotionality scores were correlated moderately with mean heart rates (rs > 0.33, P < 0.01) from the novel stimulus and isolation tests and with walking scores (rs = 0.47, P < 0.01) from the novel stimulus test.
Rank correlations between mean heart rates and behavioural measures were higher in the novel stimulus (rs = 0.66, P < 0.01) than the isolation test (rs = 0.55, P < 0.01), indicating that the novel stimulus test ranked horses based on either physiological or behavioural responses more similarly than did the isolation test.
Similar(23)
The web interface used during the Double Stimulus tests.
Both isolation and novel stimulus tests produced valid measurements.
In all cases, we recorded whether or not bees extended the proboscis to the stimulus tested.
Scores may therefore vary from 0 (no response to any stimulus tested in the series) to 6 (responses to all six stimuli of the series).
This was true for each tone-burst stimulus tested except 24 kHz.
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