Data for: Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks

Response setups for use with three+ alternative choice designs offer competing conceptualizations that stimulus-response setups can draw from, especially as paradigm complexity increases. We explore this topic through comparing a unimanual (Experiment 1, N = 34) and a bimanual response setup (Experiment 2, N = 32) for use with a complex three-alternative forced choice task. Crucially, one of the stimulus categories (‘mixed’) was composed of stimulus elements from the other two stimulus categories used in that task. A simple three-alternative forced choice task (reference button task) was included to isolate the motoric component of response registration. This dataset contains ten files; two RStudio code files allowing for easy replication of how the analyses was conducted, two .txt containing this code, five datafiles containing the raw data the code draws from, and one readme.txt file. This version contains updated code for the analyses of error rate, using a binomial rather than a gamma family for GLM model fitting.

针对三种以上替代选择设计的数据集响应设置提供了相互竞争的概念化解释，这些解释可以用于刺激-响应设置，尤其是在范式复杂性增加的情况下。本研究通过比较单一手操作（实验1，N = 34）和双手操作响应设置（实验2，N = 32）在复杂的三选择强制选择任务中的应用，探讨了这一主题。关键的是，其中一个刺激类别（“混合”）由该任务中使用的另外两个刺激类别中的刺激元素组成。为了隔离响应注册的动觉成分，还包括了一个简单的三选择强制选择任务（参考按钮任务）。该数据集包含十个文件；两个RStudio代码文件，允许轻松复制分析的实施过程，两个.txt文件包含此代码，五个数据文件包含代码所引用的原始数据，以及一个readme.txt文件。本版本包含用于分析错误率的代码更新，使用二项分布而非伽马分布族来拟合GLM模型。