I am having a hard time being able to launch the mouse tracking sample study that is under the tutorial. I wanted to know if that is currently the intention or if there may be a problem with either my browser or how I am accessing it. 

More specifics: 
- Under "Tutorial: Mouse-tracking Study Example", when I click on where it says "Click here to see a finished version" it takes me to the home screen of the study displaying the option to read the consent form. 
- When I click the [2. Participate] button it doesn't initiate the study. 

Thanks! 

Taking research online presents challenges. In the lab we know participants are using a mouse and headphones for our audio + mouse tracking paradigm, but online how do we know? We have them agree at the beginning to use these things, but at the end we ask how they took the study and half of them did not use a mouse. So, we do not give them credit for the study. Here is the problem: we have to see their answers to determine if they get credit. Our human subjects pool wants us to award credit within 24 hours. Right now I can't see the responses until the FindingFive session is over, right? So, what do I do. I feel stuck. I can't open a new session every day. I need to open a session once a week and have it run for a week to collect participants. But I also need to award credit to participants for taking the study within 24 hours, but I can't do that if I can't see their responses. Am I missing something that would allow me to see individual responses while the session is open? If not, then, as a researcher, I feel this is a major flaw in the platform that should be addressed as soon as possible. I hope I am just missing something. Thanks.

Hi! Is there a way to put a link into my FindingFive study so that participants just need to click it to go into a new window (ex. if they need to take a survey in Qualtrics)?

Paying Participants Made Easier

Together with building a participant pool, we have now also opened our payment system for a public beta test! As a researcher, you can now pay participants directly on FindingFive, without having to arrange your own payments. We charge a low flat fee of 15%, and participants will get paid the very next day. Read our blog post here to learn more.

I've noticed some typos in the API and the tutorials and thought you might want to know  I thought I could start listing them here and then other users can add to this if they find them too.
In tutorial https://news.findingfive.com/2019/05/29/...of-trials/
In 'Adjust the time between trials (inter-trial intervals)', in the final line, you write: By setting the delay to 2, each trial will start with 2 trials of a blank screen
But I think you mean: By setting the delay to 2, each trial will start with 2 seconds of a blank screen

With what browsers are FF experiments compatible?

A new feature has been added to the “stimulus_pattern” property in trial templates! The new “limit” feature allows researchers to sample a subsection of their stimuli listed in a trial template. 

A common implementation of the feature is to set “stimulus_pattern”: {“order”: “random”, “limit”: K} so that K (where K is an integer) stimuli randomly sampled from the trial template are presented to the participant. This setup is useful for researchers running large numbers of participants who want to show a random sample of stimuli to each participant. 

“limit” can be combined with other stimulus pattern orders, as well. Read more in our grammar reference here: https://help.findingfive.com/api/trial-t...s-patterns Questions? Reply in this thread and we will answer!

Hello,

I am a journalist, most well known for my work reporting on technology and culture for National Public Radio(NPR). As part of my research for a story on cyber bullying I am working with two post-doctoral students. We all met and began our work together as part of a fellowship with the Diverse Intelligence Summer Institute ( https://www.diverseintelligencessummer.com/) 
 We are looking at the effect of using the voice to respond to a provocative story on social media.

We think that Finding Five is the right platform for our research. But we have some questions about capabilities on the platform and whether you might be able to help us use the platform for the study.

The basic idea of the study is to set up a page that looks a lot like Facebook with a story from a user that is designed to provoke anger and controversy. We then want to see what happens if people have to use voice to text software to respond and therefore have to hear themselves speak versus simply writing their response in text. The question is whether hearing yourself speak makes you less inclined to bully?

We also would like to add other possibilities to our control groups. For example we want to make it possible for people to record themselves using voice to text and then to hear it played back to them before they send it. Instead of simply hearing their own voice, we wonder if it’s possible for it to be read back by some kind of computer voice.  We would also like it if they could erase what they heard and re-record. Finally, we would like to enable the people who did voice to text to make any corrections by simply fixing the text itself.

I’m writing to you because I want to see whether or not we will be able to set up a system on Finding Five that would allow this? If Finding Five is not currently set up to do this would it be possible to work with someone there to create this kind of interface? Lastly I’m wondering what the costs of this study would be?

We look forward to hearing from you. 

Kind Regards,

Laura Sydell
Emily Winokur
Judit Mokos

Hi, I've been working on designing a study where a sound is played, a crosshair flashes, a sound is played, a crosshair flashes, a third sound is played, and a final crosshair flashes on the screen. The participant should press F if the third sound is the same as the first one, and they should press J if the third sound is the same as the second one. 
The issue that I'm having is that I want the crosshair to appear in the center of the screen each time, but instead it has been appearing from left to right even after the crosshair disappears. 

This is an example of my current setup:
Trial template: 
"MainTrialStimuliA":{
  "type": "AFC",
  "auto_advance": true,
  "delay": 0.1,
    "stimuli":  [["audioStim1", "crosshair", "audioStim2", "crosshair", "audioStim1", "crosshair2"]],
  "responses": [["ResponseF"]]
},

audioStmi1 (audioStim2 has the same setup):
{
  "type": "audio",
  "content": "dent retr 1 vcls vcng 0 aCa.mp3",
  "visible": false,
  "delay": 1
}


crosshair:
{
  "type": "text",
  "content": "+",
  "alignment": "center",
  "duration": 1,
  "size": "24px",
  "delay": 1
}

crosshair2:
{
  "type": "text",
  "content": "x",
  "alignment": "center",
  "duration": 1,
  "size": "24px",
  "delay": 1
}

I'm trying to set up a study in which participants must 'pass' the training trials with a criterion accuracy score to continue. I'd like to branch to repeat training iff the initial training block score is too low. I get that I can use the "iterations": feature, which is cool. But the problem is that I need to compute the score based not on one response but based on two responses. This is necessary because, half the time, the answer "same" is correct and half the time "different" is correct, and the total score is a combination of the two.
Am I missing a simple solution here, such as coding same and different as a single response somehow?  Or combining two different triggers? Thanks for any suggestions!