Computerized process control in behavioral science research

Scholz, Karl W.

doi:10.3758/bf03207867

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first generation of programming languages in psychology were typically specialized process control languages working in small memory partitions (e.g., Schneider & Scholz, 1973;Scholz, 1972) operating with less than 16Kof memory on machines such as the DEC PDP-8 or the IBM 1800. The second generation had two major variants.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles

Schneider

1988

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers

753

508

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Micro Experimental Laboratory (MEL)is a third-generation integrated software system for experimental research. The researcher fills in forms, and MEL writes the experimental program, runs the experiments, and analyzes the data. MEL includes a form-based user interface, automatic programming, computer tutorials, a compiler, a real-time data acquisition system, database management, statistical analysis, and subject scheduling. It can perform most reaction time, questionnaire, and text comprehension experiments with little or no programming. It includes a Pascal-like programming language and can call routines written in standard languages. MEL operates on IBM PC compatible computers and supports most display controllers. MEL maintains millisecond timing with high-speed text and graphics presentation. MEL provides a systematic approach to dealing with nine concerns in running an experimental laboratory.Developers of any software system for experimentation must trade off considerations of flexibility, learnability, ease of use, precision, experiment generation time, and experimental qualitycontrolto maximize systemperformance. Incorporation of advances in hardware and software technology allow for quantum jumpsin termsof system performance given the above considerations. The Micro Experimental Laboratory (MEL) optimizes these trade-offs within the constraints of personal computers with640Kof memory, human factors considerations about interfacetechnology, fourth-generation software technology, and the use of automatic programming techniques.MEL is a third-generation psychology software system that builds on the lessons learned from earlier programming systems. The first generation of programming languages in psychology were typically specialized process control languages working in small memory partitions (e.g., Schneider & Scholz, 1973;Scholz, 1972) operating with less than 16Kof memory on machines such as the DEC PDP-8 or the IBM 1800. The second generation had two major variants. The first was the subroutine approach, whichinvolved a seriesof subroutines that are called from FORTRAN or Pascal programs (e.g., Osgood, 1985Osgood, , 1988) running on DEC PDP-lIs or Apple lls with 64K of usable memory per process.1 The second variant was the stimulus presentation approach (Eamon, 1982;Poltrock& Foltz, 1982, in whichfixed displays were presented in prespecified orders on Apple II computers. The orders could be either specified within one of three prescribed paradigms, as in CEDATS (Eamon, 1982), or explicitly enumerated, as in APT (poltrock & Foltz, 1982(poltrock & Foltz, , 1988. The subroutine package approach was flexible but required that graduate students be trained as programmers and involved longdevelopment timesto generate experiments. The stimulus presentation approach allowed fastexperiment specification at the costof reduced flexibility and a great deal of typing to enumerate all the stimuli and the stimulus orderings.MEL is a third-generation psychology software system that operates on IBM PCs with 640K of mem...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles

Schneider

1988

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers

753

508

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SLEEP will then return to the user's program (i.e., the program will "awake") whenever something occurs (e.g., a timer times out or a response is made) that requires the program to service it. Since the return is to the next statement following the call to SLEEP, the top-entry problem discussed by Scholz (1972) is avoided. Most of the subroutines in this package were written to use the SLEEP subroutine.…”

Section: The Subroutinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although RSX provides the standard WAIT subroutine, this approach has well-known shortcomings (Kaplan, 1977). In order to overcome these problems, we used the soft-timer approach (see Scholz, 1972). In our implementation, an array in memory is set up so that each word acts as an automatic timer.…”

Section: The Subroutinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Running laboratory experiments using the RSX operating system and FORTRAN on the PDP-11

Edgell

Hertel

1989

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A system of FORTRAN-callable subroutines designed to facilitate running laboratories with the RSX operating system on a PDP-ll computer is presented. The subroutines include ones to give the FORTRAN programmer timing capability, better control of CRT input and output, control of a parallel-bit input and output interface, control of an analog-to-digital interface, and control of a digital-to-analog interface.There are four ways that an experimenter can effect the computer programming necessary to run an experiment. First, the experimenter can program the computer in assembler language. Although this approach allows maximum flexibility and direct control of the various laboratory input/output (I/O) interfaces, it is quite cumbersome for even a very experienced programmer, and out of the reach of a novice programmer. The second approach is to use a high-level programming language. Although this is much less cumbersome and more accessible than assembler language to novice programmers, it is often difficult, if not impossible, to achieve the required timing and controlling of interfaces. The third alternative is for the experimenter to use a high-level language developed specifically for experiment control. Indeed, several such languages have been developed, for example, PROSS (Scholz, 1972). However, these languages have usually been found to be cumbersome to use, and do not give sufficient error detection. The reason for these difficulties is the large number of hours it takes to develop a highquality compiler such as those found in most implementations of standard higher level languages. No one is willing to invest this large amount of time for a language of limited use. Finally, the experimenter can use a "canned" program designedto facilitiate runningexperiments. Again, several of these have been developed, for example, MEL (Schneider, 1988). However, these programs were designed to facilitate a particular research paradigm or area. Even within that paradigm, they do not have full flexibility, but rather limit the experimental designs that can be run.One solution to this dilemma is to develop a set of subroutines that are accessible from a higher level language. Thus, the power and ease of programming in the higher level language is retained, while the subroutines effect the necessary timing and control. In addition, the programmer-even a novice-is already familiar with the higher level language. There are many examples of such developments. For example, Edgell (1974) and Castellan (1975) have reported such a system for use in BASIClanguage programs. Restle and Brown (1969), Hendry &Lennon (1973), andKaplan (1977) have reported such systems for FORTRAN. The purpose of the present paper is to present another such system. It is designed for the PDP-II computer using the RSX operating system. The present subroutine system uses FORTRAN as the higher level language. Previous reports have pointed out that FORTRAN is the best and most popular language for adapting in this manner for laboratory use (Castellan, 1976;Greg...

show abstract

“…Since the clock interrupts the CPU only once every 100 msec, it consumes less than 0.5% of the execution time. The interrupt servicing software uses a fi rs t -in-fi rst-out communication queue which minimizes the chance of having system pointers confused (see Scholz, 1972). The independence of operating system components allows the elimination of sections of it when additional core is needed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%