You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This Go/No-Go implementation measures inhibitory control by requiring a key press to frequent Go stimuli and response withholding to infrequent NoGo stimuli. The runtime uses condition-weighted generation (go:nogo = 3:1) from config and records both behavioral outcomes and trigger streams for EEG-aligned analysis.
2. Task Flow
Block-Level Flow
Step
Description
Load config
Read window/task/stimuli/timing/triggers and mode-specific section (qa or sim).
Collect participant context
Human mode uses SubInfo; QA/sim inject deterministic IDs.
Initialize runtime
Create PsychoPy window/keyboard, trigger runtime, and stimulus bank.
Instruction stage
Show localized instruction screen (and voice in human mode).
Block loop
For each block, generate weighted conditions and run all trials.
Block feedback
Show block summary with Go and NoGo accuracy.
End stage
Show goodbye screen, send experiment end trigger, save CSV.
Trial-Level Flow
Stage
Description
pre_target_fixation
Show fixation cross for jittered duration (0.8-1.0 s).
go_response_window
Go circle shown up to 1.0 s; keypress is hit, timeout is miss.
nogo_inhibition_window
NoGo square shown up to 1.0 s; keypress is false alarm, timeout is correct withhold.
Error feedback stage
Show brief feedback for Go miss or NoGo false alarm.
Controller Logic
No adaptive controller is used in this task version. Timing and condition mix are fully config-driven and deterministic given the task seed mode.
3. Configuration Summary
a. Subject Info
Field
Meaning
subject_id
Participant ID (3-digit range in current config).
subname
Participant name (pinyin).
age
Age metadata field.
gender
Categorical participant metadata field.
b. Window Settings
Parameter
Value
size
[1920, 1080]
units
deg
screen
1
bg_color
gray
fullscreen
true
monitor_width_cm
60
monitor_distance_cm
72
c. Stimuli
Stimulus ID
Type
Participant-facing content
fixation
text
White + fixation marker
go
circle
White circle target
nogo
rect
White square non-target
no_response_feedback
text
Prompt shown after Go timeout
nogo_error_feedback
text
Prompt shown after NoGo false alarm
block_break
text
Block progress plus Go/NoGo accuracy
instruction_text
textbox
Localized task instructions
good_bye
textbox
Localized closing message
d. Timing
Parameter
Value
fixation_duration
[0.8, 1.0]
go_duration
1.0
no_response_feedback_duration
0.8
nogo_error_feedback_duration
0.8
e. Triggers
Event
Code
exp_onset
98
exp_end
99
block_onset
100
block_end
101
fixation_onset
1
go_onset
10
go_response
11
go_miss
12
nogo_onset
20
nogo_response
21
nogo_miss
22
no_response_feedback_onset
30
nogo_error_feedback_onset
31
4. Methods (for academic publication)
Participants completed a Go/No-Go paradigm with a prepotent Go stream and infrequent NoGo events. The task comprised 3 blocks with 70 trials per block (210 total). Trials started with a jittered fixation interval, followed by either a Go circle or a NoGo square for up to 1.0 s. Participants pressed the space key for Go trials and withheld responses for NoGo trials. Condition generation used a 3:1 Go-to-NoGo weighting to induce response prepotency. Behavioral outcomes included Go hits/misses and NoGo false alarms/correct withholds, with block-level accuracy summaries and synchronized event triggers.
