Chat with us, powered by LiveChat PSY2061 South University Effort and Impulsivity in Reversal Learning Paper | All Paper
+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

‘Exploring the role of effort and impulsivity in reversal learning’ 
Brief introduction
One of the main characteristics of human behaviour is its flexibility. We must be able to detect regular patterns in our environment, and also be sensitive to disruptions to those regularities, so that we can adapt our behaviour accordingly. Imagine that the bus you have been catching to work every morning for the last few years has been late for the last three days. The decision that you must make is whether this represents merely a temporary disruption of otherwise regular scheduling (say, due to road-works), or whether the bus timetable has changed altogether (such that it is no longer stopping at the previously scheduled time). In other words, you must detect whether this irregularity represents a temporary change in an otherwise stable environment, or whether it represents a fundamental change in the environment altogether. 
Individuals differ significantly in how fast they learn or adapt to these sorts of situations. The way in which decisions such as this are resolved by the brain has been studied with a paradigm known as ‘probabilistic reversal learning.’ Each of these terms refer to key aspects of the paradigm: 
1. Individuals are required to learn about the relative value of stimuli presented before them (e.g., which bus you prefer to catch) 
2. The values of these stimuli periodically reverse (i.e., the bus timetable changes). 
3. The values of the stimuli vary probabilistically (i.e., even the bus you usually prefer to catch may sometimes be late, but on average is better than the other alternative).
Using this paradigm, we now have significant insights into the neural circuitry and computational mechanisms which mediate adaptive human behaviour. Flexible learning is mediated by a neural network comprising the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia (Clark et al., 2004; Cools et al., 2002; Izquierdo et al., 2017, Peterson et al., 2009), and dopamine is a key neurotransmitter in this process of reversal learning. Importantly, a separate literature has revealed that dopamine is important, not only in learning, but is also critical for motivating individuals to exert effortful actions (Chong et al., 2015). Given the dual role of dopamine in motivating effortful actions, and in probabilistic reversal learning, this study will explore the relationship between effort exertion and learning. Specifically, we ask:

1. How probabilistic reversal learning can differ based on the amount of force that individuals must exert to register their responses. 
2. How personality differences (e.g., in impulsivity) are related to learning.  

You may have been a participant in this study, but, when writing your report, it is important that you write from the perspective of the researcher.

Design
This experiment involved two phases. In an initial phase, the maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) for each participant was determined by squeezing each force dynamometer as hard as possible. Participants then undertook the learning task. Participants were presented with two abstract shapes, with one of these stimuli being more valuable on average than the other. The more valuable stimulus was rewarded 70% of the time, and the less valuable stimulus was rewarded 30% of the time. A rewarded stimulus was associated with a gain of one point, and an unrewarded stimulus was associated with no gain. The primary task was to learn which of the two stimuli was more valuable on every trial, and to accrue as many points as possible. Importantly, the relative value of the stimuli periodically reversed, such that the more valuable stimulus would then be worth less, and vice versa. Participants were instructed to detect when that change occurred, and switch their preferences accordingly. Stimuli were presented randomly to the left or right of fixation, and participants registered their preferences by squeezing the corresponding (left or right) dynamometer. Participants performed two blocks: one in which only a small force needed to be applied (5% of MVC), and the other in which a harder force was required to make a choice (30% MVC). The order of blocks was counterbalanced across participants.

Built into this design was a further experimental manipulation to examine whether the time at which participants exert a low or high force influenced learning on this task. Participants were divided into three groups (‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’). Participants in one group (‘A’) were only required to provide a single squeeze (with a high or low force) to register their choice and simultaneously receive feedback. In contrast, participants in Groups B and C were required to provide two squeezes. Those in Group B  exerted a high or low force to register their choice, and a low force to reveal the outcome. Those in Group C undertook the reverse manipulation, by always exerting low force to register their choice, but either a low or high force to reveal the outcome. For the purposes of this lab report, you should write-up the design that you personally experienced as a participant in this study (the experimenters should have informed you of the group you were assigned to at the end of the task).Those students who did not attend the experimental sessions should write-up the design as if they were in Group A.

In order to determine the relationship between learning and impulsivity, participants were administered the revised version of the UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale (Whiteside & Lynam, 2001). This version, the UPPS-P, assesses five pathways: Negative Urgency, Positive Urgency, Premeditation, Perseverance, and Sensation Seeking (Cyders et al., 2007).

The key question of this study was whether there is a difference between learning rates when low or high amounts of force were applied. For the purposes of your lab report, you will answer: 
1. Was there a difference in the total number of points scored during the low and high force blocks? 
2. Was there a difference in the total accuracy during the low and high force blocks? 
3. Was there a correlation between the total number of points scored and scores on a questionnaire measure of impulsivity?

Starting References: You will be provided with a number of papers that will provide you with some background and a rationale for the study that will form the basis of the Biological Laboratory Report. Copies of these are available on the PSY2061 Moodle website. Please print and read the following papers and bring them with you to your Week 7 lab class. 
You do not need to understand the detail of the neuroimaging analyses or computational models.

Reference

Chong et al. (2015). Dopamine enhances willingness to exert effort for reward in Parkinson’s disease. Cortex, 69, 40-46.  (A study showing that dopamine administration increases the motivation to exert physical effort.)
Clark et al. (2004). The neuropsychology of ventral prefrontal cortex: Decision-Making and reversal learning. Brain and Cognition, 55(1), 42-53 (An overview of reversal learning in the context of decision making and ventral prefrontal function.)

Cools, R. et al. (2002). Defining the neural mechanisms of probabilistic reversal learning using evenrelated functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Neuroscience, 22(11), 4563-4567 (One of the first human neuroimaging studies on probabilistic reversal learning.)

Cyders, M. A. et al. (2007). Integration of impulsivity and positive mood to predict risky behavior: Development and validation of a measure of positive urgency. Psychological Assessment, 19, 107–118. (Background on the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale. )
Izquierdo et al. (2017) The neural basis of reversal learning: An updated perspective. Neuroscience, 345, 12-26 (A good overview of reversal learning and is neurobiology, including dopamine.)

Peterson et al. (2009). Probabilistic reversal learning is impaired in Parkinson’s disease. Neuroscience, 163(4), 1092-1101 (Examined the role of dopamine in reversal learning.)

Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The Five Factor Model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences,30, 669–689 (Background on the original UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale.)
lab_report_template__1_.docx

psy2061_marking_rubric_2019.pdf

points.pdf

upps_p.pdf

accuracy.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

EFFORT AND IMPULSIVITY IN REVERSAL LEARNING
Include All Your Important Variables And A Summary Of Their Relationship Here
Name
Student Number
Unit:
Due date:
Tutor:
Lab class:
Word count:
1
EFFORT AND IMPULSIVITY IN REVERSAL LEARNING
2
Abstract
The abstract should be written concisely and is designed to present a brief summary of
your report. It should present the four main sections of the report and it should be
intelligible and complete in itself. Therefore, you should not cite figures, tables or other
sections of your paper. The first sentence should introduce the reader to the topic of the
report and should set up the objectives of the investigation. The second sentence should
provide the reader with the essential information about the participants and methods that
were used in the experiment. Next, you should also highlight the main results and their
relationship to the hypotheses. Finally, you must highlight the important conclusions and
implications (either theoretical or practical) of your research. Overall, this section must
be less than 150 words and should appear on a page of its own.
EFFORT AND IMPULSIVITY IN REVERSAL LEARNING
The introduction should begin on a new page, without a heading. It should introduce all
the relevant concepts, and define all the relevant terms in a clear and logical order.
Ultimately, the goal of the introduction is to set up the rationale and introduce the
hypotheses of the study. It should be about one third of the overall word count, and all
statements of fact must be referenced accordingly.
Method
Participants
In this section, you need to provide all the relevant details about the participants of the
study. This may include the age range, gender breakdown and any other relevant
demographic information.
Materials
You should include enough detail about the materials used in the experiment that the
reader can replicate your study based solely on what you have described. You will need
to describe any scales, questionnaires or other methods used in the experiment.
3
EFFORT AND IMPULSIVITY IN REVERSAL LEARNING
4
Procedure
In this section you will need to explain what the participants did to complete the study.
This section will rely on your descriptions of the materials in the section above. Be
careful not to repeat information that you have already described in the Materials
section. This section should focus on what the participants did to complete the study,
rather than what tools were used in the experiment.
Design
This section should explain the experimental design used in the study. It should
operationalize and define all relevant variables, as well as presenting the statistical
analysis utilized in this study.
Results
This section should start with a statement of how the data were handled prior to analysis.
Then, the descriptive information should be presented followed by the inferential
statistics, presented in a consistent chronological order. You should mention how the
data were analysed and the statistical package used. It is often appropriate to present the
data in a table to ensure it is clear to the reader.
EFFORT AND IMPULSIVITY IN REVERSAL LEARNING
Discussion
This section should begin with a statement about whether or not the hypotheses were
supported. This should be followed by an interpretation of the results using the
information that you have presented in the Introduction to guide your Discussion and
explain the results. Some discussion of the limitations of the study, as well as
implications of the findings and directions for future research should also be explored
here.
5
EFFORT AND IMPULSIVITY IN REVERSAL LEARNING
6
References
Clark et al. (2004). The neuropsychology of ventral prefrontal cortex: Decision-Making
and reversal learning. Brain and Cognition, 55(1), 42-53.doi: 10.1016/S0278-
2626(03)00284-7
Cools, R., Barker, R. A., Sahakian, B. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2003). L-Dopa medication
remediates cognitive inflexibility, but increases impulsivity in patients with
Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychologia, 41(11), 1431-1441.doi:10.1016/S0028-
3932(03)00117-9
Cyders, M. A., Smith, G. T., Spillane, N. S., Fischer, S., Annus, A. M., & Peterson, C.
(2007). Integration of impulsivity and positive mood to predict risky behavior:
Development and validation of a measure of positive urgency. Psychological
assessment, 19(1), 107.doi:10.1037/1040-3590.19.1.107
Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The five factor model and impulsivity: Using a
structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and individual
differences, 30(4), 669-689.doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00064-7
EFFORT AND IMPULSIVITY IN REVERSAL LEARNING
7
Appendix A
Any supplementary information should be contained here, and should also be referred to
in the body of your report
PSY2061 Lab Report Marking Rubric
Student name:
Poor
Fair
Good
Very good
Excellent
Title (3 marks)
Title should be written in terms of the IVs
and DVs





Title should be clearly written and
accurately reflect the theme of the lab
report and identify all relevant variables





Title should be concise <20 words No ☐ Abstract (8 marks) Summaries each of the four main sections of the report in an ordered and balanced way Accurately describes the area of research, aim/hypotheses, participant information, method (including test names), results, main conclusions and implications. Yes ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Abstract should be no more than 150 words No ☐ Yes ☐ Introduction (24 marks) Introduces and describes the general area of investigation. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Outlines the importance of the topic ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Relevant terms and constructs are explained and defined adequately. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Coverage of the relevant literature, with sufficient consideration of method and results to put the conclusions into some perspective and allow for critique of the findings. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Logical flow between paragraphs and throughout the introduction from the general to the specific ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Clearly articulated rationale showing how this experiment builds on previous research Clear statement of aim relative to variables chosen for investigation Hypotheses are operationalised, clear and concise. Method (10 marks) Participants section gives sufficient description of the sample including key ☐ ☐ demographics and sampling method. Materials section gives a clear but brief description of the questionnaires and ☐ ☐ other materials used. Procedure section gives a brief description of test administration and ☐ ☐ scoring Design section clearly outlines the design ☐ ☐ of the study and defines the IV and DV Results (14 marks) Clear statement about how data were treated prior to analysis and how analysis ☐ ☐ was conducted. Participant and descriptive characteristics ☐ ☐ summarised and trends highlighted Inferential statistics are presented correctly and accurately address the ☐ ☐ hypotheses A clear understanding of the results is ☐ ☐ demonstrated Data is presented clearly and accurately ☐ ☐ in appropriate format Discussion (24 marks) Clear summary of the main findings, with ☐ ☐ reference to aim and hypothesis. Discusses whether the results are consistent or inconsistent with previous studies discussed in the introduction Interprets and synthesises the current findings in regards to the relevant research that was presented in the introduction Briefly mentions the unique limitations of the research and how these limitations impacted the results Suggestions made for future research that logically flow from the information presented in the report. Appropriate theoretical and practical implications presented. Concluding statement that ties the report together and summarises the main contention. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ APA formatting (5 marks) Correct citation and referencing style in ☐ ☐ APA 6th. Proper formatting followed throughout in accordance with APA 6th (double spacing, page numbers, running header etc.) Reference list and citations match ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ No ☐ Appendices (2 marks) Inclusion of correct SPSS output. Correctly referred to in the text. ☐ Yes ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Expression (10 marks) Command of prose, punctuation, spelling ☐ ☐ and grammar is correct throughout. ☐ ☐ ☐ FINAL MARK (out of 10) can be found on Moodle GET FILE='C:Usersxwan0008DownloadsPoints.sav'. DATASET NAME DataSet1 WINDOW=FRONT. EXAMINE VARIABLES=LoForce HiForce diff /PLOT BOXPLOT STEMLEAF HISTOGRAM NPPLOT /COMPARE GROUPS /STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES /CINTERVAL 95 /MISSING LISTWISE /NOTOTAL. Explore Notes Output Created 09-MAY-2019 14:17:37 Comments Input Data C: Usersxwan0008Downloa dsPoints.sav Active Dataset DataSet1 Filter Weight Split File N of Rows in Working Data File Missing Value Handling Definition of Missing User-defined missing values for dependent variables are treated as missing. Cases Used Statistics are based on cases with no missing values for any dependent variable or factor used. EXAMINE VARIABLES=LoForce HiForce diff /PLOT BOXPLOT STEMLEAF HISTOGRAM NPPLOT /COMPARE GROUPS /STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES /CINTERVAL 95 /MISSING LISTWISE /NOTOTAL. Syntax Resources 171 Processor Time 00:00:02.92 Elapsed Time 00:00:01.33 Page 1 [DataSet1] C:Usersxwan0008DownloadsPoints.sav Case Processing Summary Cases Valid Missing N Percent N LoForce 171 100.0% 0 HiForce 171 100.0% diff 171 100.0% Total Percent N Percent 0.0% 171 100.0% 0 0.0% 171 100.0% 0 0.0% 171 100.0% Descriptives LoForce Statistic Std. Error Mean 98.8596 .54425 95% Confidence Interval for Lower Bound Mean Upper Bound 97.7853 5% Trimmed Mean 98.7856 Median 99.0000 Variance Std. Deviation 7.11694 82.00 Maximum 118.00 Range 36.00 Interquartile Range 10.00 .083 .186 -.148 .369 Mean 97.0702 .61930 95% Confidence Interval for Lower Bound Mean Upper Bound 95.8477 5% Trimmed Mean 97.2014 Median 97.0000 Kurtosis Variance Std. Deviation diff 50.651 Minimum Skewness HiForce 99.9340 98.2927 65.583 8.09835 Minimum 75.00 Maximum 114.00 Range 39.00 Interquartile Range 12.00 Skewness -.260 .186 Kurtosis -.113 .369 -1.7895 .68304 Mean -3.1378 Page 2 Descriptives Statistic diff 95% Confidence Interval for Lower Bound Mean Upper Bound -3.1378 5% Trimmed Mean -1.8541 Median -2.0000 Variance Std. Error -.4411 79.779 Std. Deviation 8.93191 Minimum -26.00 Maximum 25.00 Range 51.00 Interquartile Range 12.00 Skewness .164 .186 Kurtosis .152 .369 Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnova Statistic df Shapiro-Wilk Sig. Statistic * df Sig. LoForce .051 171 .200 .992 171 .491 HiForce .066 171 .068 .988 171 .152 171 * .993 171 .604 diff .061 .200 *. This is a lower bound of the true significance. a. Lilliefors Significance Correction LoForce Page 3 Histogram 25 Mean = 98.86 Std. Dev. = 7.117 N = 171 Frequency 20 15 10 5 0 80.00 90.00 100.00 110.00 120.00 LoForce LoForce Stem-and-Leaf Plot Frequency .00 2.00 3.00 3.00 8.00 12.00 10.00 21.00 12.00 17.00 20.00 18.00 14.00 14.00 8.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 Stem width: Each leaf: Stem & 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leaf 23 444 677 88899999 000000000011 2222233333 444444444555555555555 666666777777 88888888999999999 00000000001111111111 222222222222222333 44444444445555 66666666777777 88889999 01 2 4455 7 8 10.00 1 case(s) Page 4 Normal Q-Q Plot of LoForce 3 Expected Normal 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 80 90 100 110 120 Observed Value Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot of LoForce 0.3 Dev from Normal 0.2 0.1 0.0000 -0.1 -0.2 80 90 100 110 120 Observed Value Page 5 120 110 100 90 80 LoForce HiForce Histogram 25 Mean = 97.07 Std. Dev. = 8.098 N = 171 Frequency 20 15 10 5 0 80.00 90.00 100.00 110.00 HiForce HiForce Stem-and-Leaf Plot Frequency .00 4.00 7.00 Stem & 7 . 7 . 8 . Leaf 5669 0033444 Page 6 22.00 26.00 46.00 39.00 17.00 10.00 Stem width: Each leaf: 8 9 9 10 10 11 . . . . . . 5666667777778888888999 00111111122233334444444444 5555555556666666666677777777888888888889999999 000011111111222222222334444444444444444 55555666777888999 0001233444 10.00 1 case(s) Normal Q-Q Plot of HiForce 3 Expected Normal 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 70 80 90 100 110 120 Observed Value Page 7 Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot of HiForce 0.10 Dev from Normal 0.0000 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4 -0.5 70 80 90 100 110 120 Observed Value 120 110 100 90 80 70 HiForce diff Page 8 Histogram 25 Mean = -1.79 Std. Dev. = 8.932 N = 171 Frequency 20 15 10 5 0 -20.00 .00 20.00 diff diff Stem-and-Leaf Plot Frequency Stem & 1.00 Extremes 3.00 -2 . 7.00 -1 . 23.00 -1 . 30.00 -0 . 32.00 -0 . 38.00 0 . 17.00 0 . 15.00 1 . 3.00 1 . 2.00 Extremes Stem width: Each leaf: Leaf (=<-26) 012 5566689 00000011111122233444444 555555566666677777888999999999 11111111122222222223333334444444 00000011111111111122222222223333334444 55555555667778999 011222222333334 589 (>=22)
10.00
1 case(s)
Page 9
Normal Q-Q Plot of diff
4
Expected Normal
2
0
-2
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
10
20
30
Observed Value
Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot of diff
Dev from Normal
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-30
-20
-10
0
Observed Value
Page 10
30
121
13
20
10
0
-10
-20
39
-30
diff
T-TEST PAIRS=LoForce WITH HiForce (PAIRED)
/CRITERIA=CI(.9500)
/MISSING=ANALYSIS.
T-Test
Page 11
Notes
Output Created
09-MAY-2019 14:17:58
Comments
Input
Data
C:
Usersxwan0008Downloa
dsPoints.sav
Active Dataset
DataSet1
Filter

Weight

Split File

N of Rows in Working Data
File
Missing Value Handling
171
Definition of Missing
User defined missing
values are treated as
missing.
Cases Used
Statistics for each analysis
are based on the cases
with no missing or out-ofrange data for any variable
in the analysis.
T-TEST PAIRS=LoForce
WITH HiForce (PAIRED)
/CRITERIA=CI(.9500)
/MISSING=ANALYSIS.
Syntax
Resources
Processor Time
00:00:00.00
Elapsed Time
00:00:00.00
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
Pair 1
N
Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean
LoForce
98.8596
171
7.11694
.54425
HiForce
97.0702
171
8.09835
.61930
Paired Samples Correlations
N
Pair 1
LoForce & HiForce
Correlation
171
.316
Sig.
.000
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
95%
Confidence …
Mean
Pair 1
LoForce – HiForce
1.78947
Std. Deviation
8.93191
Std. Error Mean
.68304
Lower
.44114
3.13781
Page 12
Paired Samples Test
Paired …
95% Confidence
Interval of the …
Upper
Pair 1
LoForce – HiForce
3.13781
t
2.620
df
170
Sig. (2-tailed)
.010
Page 13
GET
FILE=’C:Usersxwan0008DownloadsUPPS-P.sav’.
DATASET NAME DataSet1 WINDOW=FRONT.
NONPAR CORR
/VARIABLES=TotAcc NegUrgency PosUrgency Planning Perseverance SensSeeking
/PRINT=SPEARMAN TWOTAIL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.
Nonparametric Correlations
Notes
Output Created
09-MAY-2019 14:23:38
Comments
Input
Data
C:
Usersxwan0008Downloa
dsUPPS-P.sav
Active Dataset
DataSet1
Filter

Weight

Split File

N of Rows in Working Data
File
Missing Value Handling
Definition of Missing
User-defined missing
values are treated as
missing.
Cases Used
Statistics for each pair of
variables are based on all
the cases with valid data
for that pair.
NONPAR CORR
/VARIABLES=TotAcc
NegUrgency PosUrgency
Planning Perseverance
SensSeeking
/PRINT=SPEARMAN
TWOTAIL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.
Syntax
Resources
171
Processor Time
00:00:00.00
Elapsed Time
Number of Cases Allowed
00:00:00.00
349525 cases
a
a. Based on availability of workspace memory
[DataSet1] C:Usersxwan0008DownloadsUPPS-P.sav
Page 1
Correlations
Spearman’s rho
TotAcc
Correlation Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
NegUrgency
PosUrgency
Planning
Perseverance
SensSeeking
TotAcc
NegUrgency
PosUrgency
1.000
.040
.078
-.024
.
.604
.312
.754
171
170
170
170
*
Correlation Coefficient
.040
1.000
.174
.063
Sig. (2-tailed)
.604
.
.024
.417
N
170
170
170
170
Correlation Coefficient
.078
*
.174
1.000
-.052
Sig. (2-tailed)
.312
.024
.
.502
N
170
170
170
170
-.024
.063
-.052
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed)
.754
.417
.502
.
N
170
170
170
170
-.018
**
-.003
.175*
Correlation Coefficient
Correlation Coefficient
.277
Sig. (2-tailed)
.817
.000
.972
.023
N
170
170
170
170
Correlation Coefficient
.053
*
-.160
*
.159
.166*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.491
.038
.038
.031
N
170
170
170
170
Page 2
Correlations
Spearman’s rho
TotAcc
NegUrgency
PosUrgency
Planning
Planning
Perseverance
SensSeeking
-.024
-.018
.053
Sig. (2-tailed)
.754
.817
.491
N
170
170
170
Correlation Coefficient
.063
**
-.160*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.417
.000
.038
N
170
170
170
-.052
-.003
.159*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.502
.972
.038
N
170
170
170
1.000
*
.175
.166*
.
.023
.031
170
170
170
Correlation Coefficient
*
.175
1.000
-.128
Sig. (2-tailed)
.023
.
.096
N
170
170
170
Correlation Coefficient
*
.166
-.128
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed)
.031
.096
.
N
170
170
170
Correlation Coefficient
Correlation Coefficient
Correlation Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Perseverance
SensSeeking
.277
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Page 3
GET
FILE=’C:Usersxwan0008DownloadsAccuracy.sav’.
DATASET NAME DataSet1 WINDOW=FRONT.
EXAMINE VARIABLES=LoForce HiForce diff
/PLOT BOXPLOT STEMLEAF HISTOGRAM NPPLOT
/COMPARE GROUPS
/STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES
/CINTERVAL 95
/MISSING LISTWISE
/NOTOTAL.
Explore
Notes
Output Created
09-MAY-2019 14:11:15
Comments
Input
Data
C:
Usersxwan0008Downloa
dsAccuracy.sav
Active Dataset
DataSet1
Filter

Weight

Split File

N of Rows in Working Data
File
Missing Value Handling
Definition of Missing
User-defined missing
values for dependent
variables are treated as
missing.
Cases Used
Statistics are based on
cases with no missing
values for any dependent
variable or factor used.
EXAMINE
VARIABLES=LoForce
HiForce diff
/PLOT BOXPLOT
STEMLEAF HISTOGRAM
NPPLOT
/COMPARE GROUPS
/STATISTICS
DESCRIPTIVES
/CINTERVAL 95
/MISSING LISTWISE
/NOTOTAL.
Syntax
Resources
171
Processor Time
00:00:02.89
Elapsed Time
00:00:01.41
Page 1
[DataSet1] C:Usersxwan0008DownloadsAccuracy.sav
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid
Missing
N
Percent
N
LoForce
171
100.0%
0
HiForce
171
100.0%
diff
171
100.0%
Total
Percent
N
Percent
0.0%
171
100.0%
0
0.0%
171
100.0%
0
0.0%
171
100.0%
Descriptives
Statistic
LoForce
Mean
.6288
95% Confidence Interval for Lower Bound
Mean
Upper Bound
.6191
5% Trimmed Mean
.6299
Median
.6333
Variance
Std. Deviation
HiForce
.00492
.6385
.004
.06429
Minimum
.47
Maximum
.77
Range
.31
Interquartile Range
.09
Skewness
-.281
.186
Kurtosis
-.336
.369
Mean
.6255
.00524
95% Confidence Interval for Lower Bound
Mean
Upper Bound
.6152
5% Trimmed Mean
.6258
Median
.6292
Variance
Std. Deviation
.6358
.005
.06848
Minimum
.40
Maximum
.84
Range
.44
Interquartile Range
.08
Skewness
Kurtosis
diff
Std. Error
Mean
-.164
.186
.351
.369
-.0031
.00578
-.0145
Page 2
Descriptives
Statistic
diff
95% Confiden …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment