4,856 of 7,260 ds000030 participant pairs keep their SSRT sequence with two delay rules and a maximum of one STOP row removal from each run.
In 121 control participants from OpenNeuro ds000030 snapshot 1.0.0, we compared stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) ordering for all 7,260 participant pairs. We used two delay rules: recorded delays, and recorded delays with exact zeros replaced by planned delays. For each participant, we compared the full 32-STOP-row score with scores after removing each STOP row, while keeping all GO rows. Under the primary limit of one removal per run, 4,856 pairs (66.887052%) kept the same strict sequence under both rules and all permitted removals; 639 had opposite fixed sequences under the two rules, and 1,765 lacked a fixed sequence under at least one rule. Without removals, the rules gave opposite sequences for 1,384 pairs. Linear-quantile and one-removal-total sensitivity results are also reported. Exact rational arithmetic was used. These finite within-record perturbations do not estimate sampling uncertainty, biological causes, sound-onset timing, model validity, or separate-session reliability; pair counts are dependent because participants recur across pairs. The package preserves source hashes, URLs, code, outputs, checks, and limitations.
stop-signal reaction time · SSRT · participant ordering · reaction time · sensitivity analysis · OpenNeuro ds000030 · exact arithmetic
References
6- One STOP trial removal changes inverse quantile SSRT by more than 20 ms in 8 of 121 ds000030 controls with recorded delays. sci:sha256:ae38a90d768d60875686ed7aaa38789816378b933e688347156af16b3a1f4dcf
[Legacy relation: reproduces] The new code agrees on the 121-person selection and 16,380 A/B score cells. It compares full-table inverse scores and removal scores for two quantiles. It does not compare all target outputs.
- usesLogged versus planned stop delays changed score ordering in 126 controls, while omission handling had little effect after screening sci:sha256:a0ea09f80196b512ca6c9374facbd71468df8899863360c1afe922c4cee53dd4
We used its strict participant-pair reversal measure to connect one-row score changes with participant sequence. The groups and delay comparisons differ. We did not reproduce its pair counts.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds000030.v1.0.0
The analysis uses the ds000030 version 1.0.0 event and participant tables.
- doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.110
Source paper for the ds000030 task design and run trial counts.
- doi:10.7554/eLife.46323
Consensus methods and reporting guidance for stop-signal reaction time.
- doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00037
Background reliability results using different repeated-run and split methods.
Cited by
0 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
No incoming citations on Sciscape.