This script creates visualizations for Social Cross-situational Word Learning Project. For the statistical models, see the .Rmd file for the manuscript.
Clear workspace and set working directory
Read in data from all 4 Experiments:
| condition | intervalNum | numPicN | n_subs |
|---|---|---|---|
| No-Social | 0 | 2 | 46 |
| No-Social | 0 | 4 | 39 |
| No-Social | 0 | 6 | 39 |
| No-Social | 0 | 8 | 44 |
| No-Social | 1 | 2 | 45 |
| No-Social | 1 | 4 | 47 |
| No-Social | 1 | 6 | 35 |
| No-Social | 1 | 8 | 37 |
| No-Social | 3 | 2 | 42 |
| No-Social | 3 | 4 | 46 |
| No-Social | 3 | 6 | 36 |
| No-Social | 3 | 8 | 41 |
| No-Social | 7 | 2 | 50 |
| No-Social | 7 | 4 | 42 |
| No-Social | 7 | 6 | 34 |
| No-Social | 7 | 8 | 40 |
| Social | 0 | 2 | 48 |
| Social | 0 | 4 | 82 |
| Social | 0 | 6 | 37 |
| Social | 0 | 8 | 43 |
| Social | 1 | 2 | 44 |
| Social | 1 | 4 | 88 |
| Social | 1 | 6 | 44 |
| Social | 1 | 8 | 44 |
| Social | 3 | 2 | 47 |
| Social | 3 | 4 | 87 |
| Social | 3 | 6 | 40 |
| Social | 3 | 8 | 43 |
| Social | 7 | 2 | 47 |
| Social | 7 | 4 | 90 |
| Social | 7 | 6 | 38 |
| Social | 7 | 8 | 38 |
Get test trials for analysis. Here we have 2 filters:
Get the number of subjects filtered out
| condition | n_subs | n_subs_filt |
|---|---|---|
| No-Social | 663 | 663 |
| Social | 847 | 770 |
Next we compare reaction times across social/no-social at different levels of attention and memory demands.
Clean up the variable names for plotting.
Now we plot mean reaction times for each condition.
In Experiment 2, we chose a subset of the referent/interval conditions: numPic = 4, and interval = 0 and 3.
Get the number of subjects in each condition.
| condition | interval | n_subs |
|---|---|---|
| No-socialFirst | Three | 81 |
| No-socialFirst | Zero | 79 |
| SocialFirst | Three | 80 |
| SocialFirst | Zero | 82 |
Exposure trials.
Get the number of subjects filtered out by the subject level filter.
| condition | n_subs | n_subs_filt |
|---|---|---|
| No-socialFirst | 159 | 159 |
| SocialFirst | 162 | 162 |
Test trial filters.
Accuracy, selecting target of gaze.
## # A tibble: 2 x 3
## condition_trial median_rt mean_rt
## <fctr> <dbl> <dbl>
## 1 no-social 5010.5 5388.491
## 2 social 3942.5 4148.283
RT on exposure trials.
Plot RT differences
Get means and CIs for each condition.
Now plot accuracy for test trials.
Accuracy barplots
| prop_cond_clean | experiment | n_subs |
|---|---|---|
| 0% | replication | 99 |
| 100% | replication | 96 |
| 25% | replication | 97 |
| 50% | replication | 100 |
| 75% | replication | 98 |
Plot proportion of participants who chose target of gaze as a function of condition.
Plot relationship between reliablity condition and subjective reliabiltiy judgments.
Plot subjective reliability as a function of choosing the gaze target.
Here we plot accuracy at test as a function of how long participants inspected the display during exposure at the trial level.
First we need to get RT on exposure for each test trial
| interval | inspection_cond | n_subs |
|---|---|---|
| Three | long | 93 |
| Three | short | 89 |
| Zero | long | 93 |
| Zero | short | 90 |
Now plot.
Now the same plot, but collapsed across inspection conditions.
Finally, we want to compare the inpection time data to the participant controlled version (experiment 2).
Overall, we see a similar pattern of data. Interval affects same trials more than switch trials. Same trials are easier than switch trials. And participants in the no-gaze condition do better on switch trials.
But maybe some tricky things to interpret here? One, it looks like adding fixed inspection time made the task harder overall. Two, there is a small difference on Same trials, with better performance in the Gaze condition. And three, inspection time seems to affect switch trial performance in the no-gaze condition more than the gaze condition. Why?
Now the same plot, but as a bar graph.