We don't know what you did last summer. On the importance of transparent reporting of reaction time data pre-processing.

In behavioral, cognitive, and social sciences, reaction time measures are an important source of information. However, analyses on reaction time data are affected by researchers' analytical choices and the order in which these choices are applied. The results of a systematic literature review, presented in this paper, revealed that the justification for and order in which analytical choices are conducted are rarely reported, leading to difficulty in reproducing results and interpreting mixed findings. To address this methodological shortcoming, we created a checklist on reporting reaction time pre-processing to make these decisions more explicit, improve transparency, and thus, promote best practices within the field. The importance of the pre-processing checklist was additionally supported by an expert consensus survey and a multiverse analysis. Consequently, we appeal for maximal transparency on all methods applied and offer a checklist to improve replicability and reproducibility of studies that use reaction time measures.

The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing.

Studies using a grammaticality decision task have revealed surprising flexibility in the processing of word order during sentence reading in both alphabetic and non-alphabetic scripts. Participants in these studies typically exhibit a transposed-word effect, in which they make more errors and slower correct responses for stimuli that contain a word transposition and are derived from grammatical as compared to ungrammatical base sentences. Some researchers have used this finding to argue that words are encoded in parallel during reading, such that multiple words can be processed simultaneously and might be recognised out of order. This contrasts with an alternative account of the reading process, which argues that words must be encoded serially, one at a time. We examined, in English, whether the transposed-word effect provides evidence for a parallel-processing account, employing the same grammaticality decision task used in previous research and display procedures that either allowed for parallel word encoding or permitted only the serial encoding of words. Our results replicate and extend recent findings by showing that relative word order can be processed flexibly even when parallel processing is not possible (i.e., within displays requiring serial word encoding). Accordingly, while the present findings provide further evidence for flexibility in the processing of relative word order during reading, they add to converging evidence that the transposed-word effect does not provide unequivocal evidence for a parallel-processing account of reading. We consider how the present findings may be accounted for by both serial and parallel accounts of word recognition in reading.

Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes.

In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students' scientific literacies (i.e. students' understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) student engagement (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students' attitudes towards science (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship.

Phonological precision for word recognition in skilled readers.

According to the lexical quality hypothesis, differences in the orthographic, semantic, and phonological representations of words will affect individual reading performance. While several studies have focused on orthographic precision and semantic coherence, few have considered phonological precision. The present study used a suite of individual difference measures to assess which components of lexical quality contributed to competition resolution in a masked priming experiment. The experiment measured form priming for word and pseudoword targets with dense and sparse neighbourhoods in 84 university students. Individual difference measures of language and cognitive skills were also collected and a principal component analysis was used to group these data into components. The data showed that phonological precision and NHD interacted with form priming. In participants with high phonological precision, the direction of priming for word targets with sparse neighbourhoods was facilitatory, while the direction for those with dense neighbourhoods was inhibitory. In contrast, people with low phonological precision showed the opposite pattern, but the interaction was non-significant. These results suggest that the component of phonological precision is linked to lexical competition for word recognition and that access to the mental lexicon during reading is affected by differing levels of phonological processing.

Do dyslexia and stuttering share a processing deficit?

This study assessed the prevalence of childhood stuttering in adults with dyslexia (AWD) and the prevalence of dyslexia in adults who stutter (AWS). In addition, the linguistic profiles of 50 AWD, 30 AWS and 84 neurotypical adults were measured. We found that 17 out of 50 AWD (34 %) reported stuttering during childhood compared to 1 % of the neurotypical population. This was moderated by the severity of dyslexia: People with mild dyslexia showed a lower prevalence rate (15 %) of childhood stuttering than those with severe dyslexia (47 %). In addition, we observed that 50 % of the AWS (n = 30) fulfilled the diagnostic criteria of dyslexia, even though they had never been diagnosed as dyslexic. Compared to neurotypical adults, phonological working memory, awareness, and retrieval were similarly reduced in AWS and AWD. The findings supports the view that stuttering and dyslexia may share a phonological deficit.

Ontogeny vs. phylogeny in primate/canid comparisons: A meta-analysis of the object choice task.

The Object Choice Task (OCT) is a widely used paradigm with which researchers measure the ability of a subject to comprehend deictic (directional) cues, such as pointing gestures and eye gaze. There is a widespread belief that nonhuman primates evince only a weak capacity to use deictic cues; in contrast, domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) tend to demonstrate high success rates. This pattern of canid superiority has been taken to support the Domestication Hypothesis, which posits enhancing effects of artificial selection on the sociocognitive abilities of dogs and humans. Here we review nearly two decades of published findings, using variants of the OCT. We find systematic confounds with species classification in task-relevant preparation of the subjects, in the imposition of a barrier between reward and subject, and in the specific deictic cues used to indicate the location of hidden objects. Thus, the widespread belief that dogs outperform primates on OCTs is undermined by the systematic procedural differences in the assessments of these skills, differences that are confounded with taxonomic classification.