Sentence examples for swap condition from inspiring English sources
Priming effects were computed for each of the high-magnitude and low-magnitude reward conditions separately by subtracting the RTs observed in the no-swap condition from those in the swap condition.
The analysis included a partitioning of trials into a "swap" condition, where the colour that defined the distractor had defined the target in the previous trial (and vice versa), and a "same" condition, in which the colours that defined the target and distractor were the same as those employed in the previous trial.
Our expectation was that capture would vary as a function of intertrial condition, such that RF-scaled proximity hemispheric effects would increase in the "swap" condition, but that static distractor costs possibly tied to perceptual filtering would remain the same in both "same" and "swap" conditions.
Neither the main effect of hemisphere [ F 1, 13) = 2.63, p =.129] nor the interaction [ F 1, 13) = 1.77, p =.207] was significant, but a planned t test comparison of same versus contralateral hemisphere in the swap condition indicated the reliability of this simple effect [ t(13) = 2.69, p =.019].
Trials were sorted into a "same" condition, corresponding to trials in which the colour that defined the target was the same as the one that had defined the target in the previous trial (and vice versa), and a "swap" condition, corresponding to trials on which the colour that defined the target was the same as the one that had defined the distractor in the previous trial (and vice versa).
Critically, these factors did not interact [ F 4, 52) < 1], and planned follow-up t tests revealed that proximity had a significant effect on RT in each of the "same" [ F 4, 52) = 4.11, p =.006] and "swap" conditions [ F 4, 52) = 2.639, p =.044] when examined in isolation.
As mentioned in Section 3.1, the basis vectors are exchanged if swapping condition in (7) is not satisfied.
The students were randomly allocated to one condition for the first experiment on one day and then swapped condition for their second experiment on the second day.
The students were randomly allocated to one condition for the first experiment on 1 day and then swapped condition for their second experiment on the second day.
Later, Nieto and Rodríguez-López slightly modified the hypothesis of the previous result swapping condition (c) by the fact that ( X, d, ≼ ) is nondecreasing-regular in the following sense.
One of the interesting results in this direction was reported by Nieto and Rodríguez-López in [19], who slightly modified the hypothesis of the previous result swapping condition (c) with the fact that ( X, d, ≼ ) is nondecreasing-regular as follows.
