Results of the interim tests.

<p>Bars show F-scores (the harmonic mean of precision and recall) for the immediate and 1–2 month test sessions, along with permuted baseline and yoked control scores. Blue and red lines give precision and recall scores respectively for each participant and condition (means for permuted baseline). Error bars show 95% confidence intervals.</p

Probability of making a correct segmentation decision at a particular location in a sentence, plotted by whether there was a boundary at that location.

<p>Results are averaged across participants, and binned by the logarithm of the highest frequency word at the boundary (e.g., at the boundary between two words, the higher of the two word frequencies). Points show means, intervals show binomial 95% confidence intervals with a non-informative Beta prior, and lines show a loess smoother.</p

Percent correct performance on a set of 2 AFC test trials administered three years after training.

<p>Dots show individual participants' performance in one frequency range and are jittered slightly on the horizontal to avoid overplotting. Lines show best fitting half-logit regression models for individual participants.</p

Example of misaligned photo and two-tone image pair.

<p>This image shows the actual degree of misalignment, but participants were never informed about the degree or direction of misalignment or even if any misalignment or distortion occurred between the images. The intersection of the horizontal and vertical red lines shows the same geometric point relative to the frame of the images. Participants could identify these matching points even without reference to the underlying images (for example, if the cards were blank). Actual corresponding features are shown with the red dot, and were displaced 1.8 cm in a direction that varied from image pair to image pair.</p

Upper left: an example two-tone stimulus from the Pirahã study.

<p>Subjects were first presented the two-tone alone and asked to point to the location of an eye or person in the image. Red circles mark where Pirahã participants indicated an eye, and numbers indicate individual participants. Circles outside the image show responses of the form “there are no eyes here.” Only two participants (2,8) correctly pointed to an eye in this image during Stage 1. Upper right: Performance of Pirahã participants on the original photo, which was presented alone after the two-tone image was removed from view. All participants correctly pointed to one of the two eyes. Bottom row: performance of Pirahã participants on the two-tone image during Stage 3, when it was shown side-by-side with the photo. Two Pirahã participants succeeded uncued (2 & 8), two more succeeded with the photo present, indicating reorganization (3 & 4), and five did not show evidence of photo-triggered perceptual reorganization (1, 5, 6, 7, 9).</p

All stimuli used in the experiment.

<p>Row 1 shows warm-up items with simpler transformations: houseboat and jaguar. Rows 2–6 show test items. Left column: squirrel monkey, alligator, woman in hut, sloths, older man. Right column: ocelot, howler monkey, toucan, tapir, fisherman. Cue items are shown to the left of test items. For full size stimuli, see Figures S1–S12 in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0110225#pone.0110225.s002" target="_blank">File S1</a> in order to recreate viewing conditions under which recognition is trivial for western adults.</p

Supplementary materials from Data availability, reusability and analytic reproducibility: evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal Cognition

Additional methodogical information, analyses, and result