Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35768741›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2023

Simulating behavior to help researchers build experiments.

Joshua R de Leeuw, Rebecca A Gilbert, Nikolay Petrov, Björn Luchterhandt

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Joshua R de LeeuwDepartment of Cognitive Science, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, NY, USA. jdeleeuw@vassar.edu.
Rebecca A GilbertMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Nikolay PetrovCardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre, University of Cardiff, Cardiff, UK.
Björn LuchterhandtDepartment of Computer Science, Paderborn University, Paderborn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Testing that an experiment works as intended is critical for identifying design problems and catching technical errors that could invalidate the results. Testing is also time-consuming because of the need to manually run the experiment. This makes testing the experiment costly for researchers, and therefore testing is less comprehensive than in other kinds of software development where tools to automate and speed up the testing process are widely used. In this paper, we describe an approach that substantially reduces the time required to test behavioral experiments: automated simulation of participant behavior. We describe how software that is used to build experiments can use information contained in the experiment's code to automatically generate plausible participant behavior. We demonstrate this through an implementation using jsPsych. We then describe four potential scenarios where automated simulation of participant behavior can improve the way researchers build experiments. Each scenario includes a demo and accompanying code. The full set of examples can be found at https://jspsych.github.io/simulation-examples/ .

Indexed as

SoftwareComputer SimulationHumansAutomationBehavioral experimentsjsPsychMethodologySimulation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.