Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Latest Threads |
Бабка совратила юношу - я...
Forum: General Feedback
Last Post: O4kogok
Yesterday, 04:16 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 24
|
Юные бляди Мне больно ког...
Forum: General Feedback
Last Post: O4kogok
11-17-2024, 09:49 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 65
|
Study not completing all ...
Forum: Platform Improvement
Last Post: Ting
11-14-2024, 10:31 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 91
|
Castifyhub
Forum: General Feedback
Last Post: DavidKab
11-14-2024, 08:50 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 91
|
Black Friday fear and fun...
Forum: General Feedback
Last Post: Michelevah
11-10-2024, 08:05 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 104
|
Letting audio play throug...
Forum: Platform Improvement
Last Post: sten_knutsen
10-22-2024, 05:08 PM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 451
|
Jackpot Bet Online
Forum: General Feedback
Last Post: DavidHah
10-12-2024, 07:04 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 124
|
Зняття з військового облі...
Forum: General Feedback
Last Post: Craignep
10-11-2024, 08:49 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 178
|
Multiple sessions open
Forum: Platform Improvement
Last Post: aczyp
10-08-2024, 06:13 AM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 4,054
|
study launched, but unava...
Forum: Platform Improvement
Last Post: noah.nelson
10-07-2024, 12:28 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 163
|
|
|
Match-based conditional branching not functional in encrypted studies |
Posted by: Ting - 03-14-2021, 09:39 AM - Forum: Known Issues
- Replies (1)
|
|
We are aware of a problem that results in incorrect branching in encrypted studies (where participant data are encrypted). This issue only affects the branching method "match". The branching method "accuracy" is not affected.
Affected users
We are not aware of any production study being affected by this bug.
Remedies
A fix has been identified and is currently being tested. We expect to release this fix in the week of 03/14/2021.
|
|
|
Bug potentially resulting in partially missing data |
Posted by: Ting - 03-13-2021, 10:17 PM - Forum: Known Issues
- No Replies
|
|
Dear Researchers,
We have discovered a bug that may have resulted in partial loss of audio recording data. This bug has been fixed. The purpose of this post is to raise awareness in case you are affected by this bug and haven't noticed it yet.
If you collected audio recording data using the "background audio response" between February 04, 2021 and March 12, 2021, the audio recordings were not saved if and only if your study meets all the following criteria:
- The background audio response was used for collecting audio recordings
- The background audio response was set to show the volume visualizer
- Your study used the "duration" parameter in trial templates that involve the background audio response
- Your study did not use the "duration" parameter in the background audio response
As long as any one of the above statements does not apply to your study, your data are safe! However, for those who are affected, we are extremely sorry that the audio recordings are permanently lost. Our sincere apologies!
Remedies
Please do not use the trial-level "duration" parameter for any response-level control. You should always look for solutions that are part of individual responses. In this instance, one should always use the "duration" parameter of an audio response (background or not) for controlling the length of an audio recording.
The most effective way to avoid and help FindingFive catch unpleasant bugs like this is to always preview your study all the way to the end and examine the preview data before launching a new session. We will fix any issues noticed in previews as soon as possible.
|
|
|
Conditional (following) response |
Posted by: cjsrka14 - 03-01-2021, 01:13 PM - Forum: Study Grammar & Management
- Replies (6)
|
|
Hi, Findingfive!
I am writing because I would like to ask you whether there is anything like conditional response for stimuli.
I am designing an experiment, in which participants are asked to listen to audio stimuli and record real words if they heard any in the stimuli. So, basically I need two responses for each stimulus as follows.
i) Choice response ("yes" or "no"): Whether you heard any real word
ii) Audio response (conditional - if "yes"): If you heard any, please say what you heard.
I would like to make the audio response only available to those who put "yes" in the choice response. I read through the tutorials and grammar reference documents but was not able to find anything like that.
I do apologize for any inconvenience.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Cheonkam Jeong
|
|
|
General Error? |
Posted by: czeidan - 02-25-2021, 11:13 AM - Forum: Study Grammar & Management
- Replies (11)
|
|
Hello, I am receiving the error below:
"Your study contains coding errors that we cannot automatically detect yet. Please refer to the Study Grammar Reference Your study contains coding errors that we cannot automatically detect yet. Please refer to the Study Grammar Reference for help."
The task was working perfectly fine. I added stimuli and then received this error. I have referred to the Study Grammar but cannot find the problem.
|
|
|
network error in the result file |
Posted by: Zhe Gao - 02-23-2021, 03:22 AM - Forum: Study Grammar & Management
- Replies (2)
|
|
Hi,
I conducted a translation judgement task which required participants to judge whether the translations for Mandarin words were correct. In the cvs file of the results, I found several stimuli showed 2 in the network_error_repeat column. I wonder what I should do with this group of data.
Thanks!
Zhe
|
|
|
Need help coding a simple break |
Posted by: cquimpo - 02-17-2021, 12:44 AM - Forum: Study Grammar & Management
- Replies (1)
|
|
Hello, I am a research assistant. Our lab professor would like us to code a break for the users at the halfway point of the experiment that we are coding. I am not very well versed in code and after looking at grammar references for a couple of hours, I gave up. Does anyone have a format to code this kind of function? Thanks in advance.
Example:
6 Questions
Answer Question 1
Answer Question 2
Answer Question 3
*insert mandatory 15-second break with a screen that says something like "this is a mandatory break, please take a second to look away from the screen."
Answer Question 4
Answer Question 5
Answer Question 6
Finish
This is our current code:
Trial Template:
{
"Instr":{"type": "instruction",
"stimuli": ["TrainingInst"],
"duration": 10
},
"Trial1": {
"type": "basic",
"stimuli": ["video1","video2","video3","video4","video5","video6","video7","video8","video9","video10","video11","video12","video13","video14","video15","video16","video17","video18","video19","video20"],
"response_pairing": "alternate",
"stimulus_pattern": {"order": "random"},
"responses": ["1R","2R","3R","4R","5R","6R","7R","8R","9R","10R","11R","12R","13R","14R","15R","16R","17R","18R","19R","20R"],
"delay": 3
}
}
Procedure:
{
"type": "blocking",
"blocks": {
"TrialBlock": {
"trial_templates": ["Trial1"],
"cover_trials": ["Instr"]
}
},
"block_sequence": ["TrialBlock"]
}
|
|
|
Setting up a study with four different versions |
Posted by: arielchan - 02-16-2021, 06:17 PM - Forum: Study Grammar & Management
- Replies (1)
|
|
Hi, I'm wondering if there's a way to code my experiment on FindingFive so that different participants will be exposed to different versions of the experiment. To give more context, I'm describing my experiment in more details:
In my experiment, there are 4 versions (each with totally different test stimuli) + 8 practice stimuli (same across the 4 versions). The stimuli in each version should be randomized when presented to the participants, but different participants should be exposed to different versions when they take part in the study (can be either sequential or randomized). For example, Participant 1 will be exposed to Version 1 of the test, participant 2 will be exposed to Version 2.
Thank you!
|
|
|
|