Analysis of Process Data of PISA 2012 Computer-Based Problem Solving: Application of the Modified Multilevel Mixture IRT Model

total effective sample size under analysis
modified 2 level mixture item response model

Logical Connectives Modulate Attention to Simulations Evoked by the Constituents They Link Together

gestalt based properties of language simulations
equal size stimuli accompanying connectives whose simulations
unequal size stimuli accompanying connectives whose simulations

Emergent Attentional Bias Toward Visual Word Forms in the Environment: Evidence From Eye Movements

Are You Keeping an Eye on Me? The Influence of Competition and Cooperation on Joint Simon Task Performance

44 female M age=19.7, SD age=1.9, R age=18-28
compatible=301, SD compatible=27, M incompatible=307, SD incompatible=26
compatible=299, SD compatible=25, M incompatible=305, SD incompatible=25; Table 2
F(1,43)=1.82, p=0.184 Supplementary Table S2

Utrecht-Management of Identity Commitments Scale: Validation in Spanish University Students

Feeling 'Right' When You Feel Accepted: Emotional Acculturation in Daily Life Interactions With Majority Members

The Impact of Mortality Salience on Intergenerational Altruism and the Perceived Importance of Sustainable Development Goals

these 299 participants M age=35.02, SD=11.74, 46%
entering f=0.37, alpha=0.05, total sample size=299

Recognition of Facial Emotional Expressions Among Italian Pre-adolescents, and Their Affective Reactions

Those Virtual People all Look the Same to me: Computer-Rendered Faces Elicit a Higher False Alarm Rate Than Real Human Faces in a Recognition Memory Task

Gender Inequality in Household Chores and Work-Family Conflict

High-Speed Videography Reveals How Honeybees Can Turn a Spatial Concept Learning Task Into a Simple Discrimination Task by Stereotyped Flight Movements and Sequential Inspection of Pattern Elements

U=38.5, df=10; p=0.045 Supplementary Table 2
U=22.0, df=10; p=0.00 Supplementary Table 2
Whitney U=28.0; df=7; p=0.335 Supplementary Table 2
Whitney U=16.0, df=7; p=0.173 Supplementary Table 2
Whitney U=33.0, df=11; p=0.077 Supplementary Table 3
groups U=2.0, df=18, p<0.001 Supplementary Table 4
chance (33.3%) Mann Whitney U=0.0, df=18, p=0.0 Supplementary Table 5
Whitney U=0.0, df=18, p=0.0 Supplementary Table 6
Whitney U=167.0, df=18, p=0.39 Supplementary Table 7
Whitney U=20, df=19, p=0.026 Supplementary Table 7
Whitney U=28, df=18, p=0.1 Supplementary Table 7