Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(4)
Permanent and transient landmark regressors were convolved with the haemodynamic response function.
This shows that the transient landmark trials did not have a disproportionately large effect on the overall results.
Analyses were then run in the same way as for the permanent vs transient landmark comparison described above.
The landmarks were developed and characterised in an initial experiment with separate subjects (detailed in the 'Materials and methods') ensuring that the permanent and transient landmark groups were matched in terms of visual salience, how well they could be remembered, as well as other features.
Similar(56)
We therefore directly contrasted fMRI BOLD responses to permanent and transient landmarks in the whole brain.
There were 12 trials (nine involving permanent and three involving transient landmarks).
We assessed the rates at which subjects came to recognise permanent and transient landmarks.
In the second quarter (permanent landmarks = 72.7% (SD 14.4); transient landmarks = 60.4% (SD 13.1); t31 = 3.517, p = 0.001) and third quarter (permanent landmarks = 80.0% (SD 15.6); transient landmarks = 70.4% (SD 16.3); t31 = 2.361, p = 0.02), however, participants were more accurate in their recognition of permanent than transient landmarks.
Interrogating this result further, we found that that participants recognised permanent and transient landmarks equally in the first quarter (mean accuracy permanent landmarks = 57.7% (SD 9.7); transient landmarks = 58.1% (SD 17.7); t31 = 0.12, p = 0.9) and final quarter (permanent landmarks = 79.6% (SD 18.3); transient landmarks = 77.3% (SD 14); t31 = 0.55, p = 0.6).
Participants performed marginally better at identifying the transient landmarks, however the scores for the transient landmarks still only constituted an average of 38.8% (SD 27.3) of the total marks (from 25% of the trials).
Firstly, participants performed marginally better at identifying the transient landmarks, however the scores for the transient landmarks still only constituted an average of 38.8% (SD 27.3) of the total marks (from 25% of the trials).
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