Now the submission is returned because they cannot accept pdf files as figures, only PNG etc. My process: file > export > save as png. I can imagine that *fancy publisher* has enough technology to do it on their own to somewhat earn their £1400... #addedvalue

Now the submission is returned because they cannot accept pdf files as figures, only PNG etc. My process: file > export > save as png. I can imagine that *fancy publisher* has enough technology to do it on their own to somewhat earn their £1400... #addedvalue

Paper by Schmukle 19 (!) years ago came to the same conclusion:

“Estimates of both internal consistency and retest reliability lead to the conclusion that the dot probe task is a completely unreliable measure of attentional allocation”

(Via @ruben.the100.ci)

journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1...

Our new idea (but untested yet) would be looking rather into consistency of the SNARC as a differential variable (instead of its one-off measured strength)...

Thanks! The co-authors were roughly in the middle of the range. Neither the most SNARC-y person nor the reverse SNARCer were among the co-authors.
Re second question - the evidence is quite conflicting here - some studies show it is, some show it's not(holds for most correlates)

It's there and doing very well!

We looked both at categorical judgment (yellow vs. blue) and colour intensity (light vs dark blue). Spoiler alert: YES, there was SNARC in both tasks. Great collaboration with
@lillyroth.bsky.social, @tuebang.bsky.social, J. Caffier, and U.-D. Reips. @mclstrainee.bsky.social