English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In the study of nonspecific preparation, the response time (RT) to an imperative stimulus is analyzed as a function of the foreperiod (FP), the interval between a warning stimulus and the imperative stimulus. When FP is varied within blocks of trials, a downward sloping FP-RT function is usually observed. The slope of this function depends on the distribution of FPs (the more negative the skewness, the steeper the slope) and on intertrial sequences of FP (the longer the FP on the preceding trial, the steeper the slope). Because these determinants are confounded, we examined whether FP-RT functions, observed under three different FP distributions (i.e., uniform, exponential, and peaked) can be predicted, one from the other, by reweighting sequential effects. It turned out that reweighting explained very little variance of the difference between the FP-RT functions, suggesting a dominant role of temporal orienting strategies.

Reweighting sequential effects across different distributions of foreperiods: Segregating elementary contributions to nonspecific preparation