<![CDATA[FindingFive Discussion Forum - Study Grammar & Management]]>

<![CDATA[FindingFive Discussion Forum - Study Grammar & Management]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/ Mon, 01 Jun 2026 14:29:18 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Another FF Prolific question]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=853 Tue, 24 Feb 2026 21:30:05 +0000 bisonlab@ucsc.edu]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=853
What also confuses me is that Prolific seems to believe there is no integration. They said that Finding Five is not listed among current survey integrations. All help and screenshots would be appreciated! In a perfect world, the study would go:
recruited on Prolific, which leads them to Qualtrics, where they get assigned a PID. Then they are directed to FF to put in an access code, and do not have to give out any personal info/login. They input their PID, which they got from Qaultrics into the Finding Five portion at the start.

If that is not possible, I would love to know. Thank you again for your quick response and help!]]>
What also confuses me is that Prolific seems to believe there is no integration. They said that Finding Five is not listed among current survey integrations. All help and screenshots would be appreciated! In a perfect world, the study would go:
recruited on Prolific, which leads them to Qualtrics, where they get assigned a PID. Then they are directed to FF to put in an access code, and do not have to give out any personal info/login. They input their PID, which they got from Qaultrics into the Finding Five portion at the start.

If that is not possible, I would love to know. Thank you again for your quick response and help!]]> <![CDATA[Prolific integration w/o FF login]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=849 Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:20:46 +0000 bisonlab@ucsc.edu]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=849 <![CDATA[Feedback Font Size]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=847 Fri, 23 Jan 2026 23:04:21 +0000 bisonlab@ucsc.edu]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=847 <![CDATA[Delay Randomization]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=844 Tue, 09 Dec 2025 18:21:19 +0000 bisonlab@ucsc.edu]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=844 "delay": 0.5]]> "delay": 0.5]]> <![CDATA[Adding arbitrary data column to how data is saved]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=842 Tue, 02 Dec 2025 16:29:15 +0000 HF2021]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=842 We have a program with 8 groups. When the data is saved, a column is dedicated to showing group number on each row of every trial of a given run (this is great!). However, we would like to know if there is a way to add arbitrary stimulus-dependent or response-dependent info individually for each trial for a given group as we set up the stimuli or responses in the program.

The reason for this is that a stimulus (an audio presentation) may be used differently across groups. So for group 1, it may be used as a “filler word A or filler word B and, list A or B, etc.”. The question is whether we can have a column that allows trial by trial entry of arbitrary information, and if yes, what is the best way to do this.

Because the same stimulus will be tagged differently for each group, I would think that this would either need to be set up in the “Responses” section during programming, or that we would have to create multiple versions of the stimulus (using the same audio file) but named differently in the stimulus section (which may not be ideal). Is there a “field” that can be defined either in stimuli or responses or through another method that can add this arbitrary trial-by-trial info to the saved data files?

Of course we can always refer back to group number to infer these tags, but as a sanity check on the data, we were wondering if this information could be directly included in the data files through either stimulus or response definitions, or another method.
Thank you very much for any guidance you may have on this!!]]> We have a program with 8 groups. When the data is saved, a column is dedicated to showing group number on each row of every trial of a given run (this is great!). However, we would like to know if there is a way to add arbitrary stimulus-dependent or response-dependent info individually for each trial for a given group as we set up the stimuli or responses in the program.

The reason for this is that a stimulus (an audio presentation) may be used differently across groups. So for group 1, it may be used as a “filler word A or filler word B and, list A or B, etc.”. The question is whether we can have a column that allows trial by trial entry of arbitrary information, and if yes, what is the best way to do this.

Because the same stimulus will be tagged differently for each group, I would think that this would either need to be set up in the “Responses” section during programming, or that we would have to create multiple versions of the stimulus (using the same audio file) but named differently in the stimulus section (which may not be ideal). Is there a “field” that can be defined either in stimuli or responses or through another method that can add this arbitrary trial-by-trial info to the saved data files?

Of course we can always refer back to group number to infer these tags, but as a sanity check on the data, we were wondering if this information could be directly included in the data files through either stimulus or response definitions, or another method.
Thank you very much for any guidance you may have on this!!]]> <![CDATA[Audio stimuli across studies]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=840 Wed, 19 Nov 2025 20:31:48 +0000 HF2021]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=840 <![CDATA[Audiovisual stimulus presentation]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=836 Wed, 29 Oct 2025 17:21:11 +0000 HF2021]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=836 I have a question about how to properly set up an audiovisual stimulus in a two-alternative forced-choice task. Any help or guidance on this would be much appreciated!!
In simple terms, the stimulus will contain an audio signal, for example, the spoken word “Myth”, and a visual component that shows two response options, two words, for example “Miss” and “Myth” on the left and right side of the screen. The participant has to choose between the two displayed words to match the audio signal they heard. The way we have currently set this up allows two words on screen by creating this response option:
{
"type": "choice",
"choices": [
"S",
"T"
],
"key_mapping": [
"S",
"T"
],
"key_only": true,
"hint": true,
"target": "T",
"feedback": false,
"feedback_audio": false,
"instruction": ""
}

This will allow the participant to either press the “T” button on the keyboard for “Myth” or the “S” key for “Miss”. Here’s the problem: currently, on the screen there will be the two choices “S” and “T” shown. What we would like to do is to have the two WORDS displayed (Myth and Miss). The pairs of words change on every trial but always involves a choice between a T sound and an S sound. The issue is that this response setup is static and will always only display “S” and “T” as options, not the actual two words that will change on every trial. Is there a way to set up the response or stimulus in a way that dynamically accepts two words as the two options that correspond to the audio signal (which changes on every trial). Thank you, and apologies if this is a simple question with an obvious answer.

The stimulus setup is currently something like this:
{
"type": "audio",
"content": "myth.wav",
"barrier": false,
"visible": false
}]]> I have a question about how to properly set up an audiovisual stimulus in a two-alternative forced-choice task. Any help or guidance on this would be much appreciated!!
In simple terms, the stimulus will contain an audio signal, for example, the spoken word “Myth”, and a visual component that shows two response options, two words, for example “Miss” and “Myth” on the left and right side of the screen. The participant has to choose between the two displayed words to match the audio signal they heard. The way we have currently set this up allows two words on screen by creating this response option:
{
"type": "choice",
"choices": [
"S",
"T"
],
"key_mapping": [
"S",
"T"
],
"key_only": true,
"hint": true,
"target": "T",
"feedback": false,
"feedback_audio": false,
"instruction": ""
}

This will allow the participant to either press the “T” button on the keyboard for “Myth” or the “S” key for “Miss”. Here’s the problem: currently, on the screen there will be the two choices “S” and “T” shown. What we would like to do is to have the two WORDS displayed (Myth and Miss). The pairs of words change on every trial but always involves a choice between a T sound and an S sound. The issue is that this response setup is static and will always only display “S” and “T” as options, not the actual two words that will change on every trial. Is there a way to set up the response or stimulus in a way that dynamically accepts two words as the two options that correspond to the audio signal (which changes on every trial). Thank you, and apologies if this is a simple question with an obvious answer.

The stimulus setup is currently something like this:
{
"type": "audio",
"content": "myth.wav",
"barrier": false,
"visible": false
}]]> <![CDATA[Choice response location]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=820 Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:39:16 +0000 wbushong]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=820 It seems like this has something to do with the image -- even though it disappears well before the response appears, it's like it's still "taking up" the center-middle position. When I remove the image from the trial and just have the two audio stimuli, the response appears in the center-middle, just as I want. Is there a way to override the location of the choice response and force it to appear in the center-middle of the screen?]]> It seems like this has something to do with the image -- even though it disappears well before the response appears, it's like it's still "taking up" the center-middle position. When I remove the image from the trial and just have the two audio stimuli, the response appears in the center-middle, just as I want. Is there a way to override the location of the choice response and force it to appear in the center-middle of the screen?]]> <![CDATA[Limiting audio replays]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=816 Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:03:29 +0000 ytgu]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=816 I'm trying to limit the number of audio replays for participants. I want them to be able to replay the audio only once. How can I implement this? I looked through the Study Grammar but unfortunately wasn’t able to find anything.
Thank you for your help!]]> I'm trying to limit the number of audio replays for participants. I want them to be able to replay the audio only once. How can I implement this? I looked through the Study Grammar but unfortunately wasn’t able to find anything.
Thank you for your help!]]> <![CDATA[text stimuli presented as a list]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=815 Wed, 14 May 2025 16:26:47 +0000 jane_lutken]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=815 Item1
Item2
Item3
Participants are told to memorize the three items before continuing. However, I keep getting the following, horizontal display instead:
Item 1 Item 2 Item 3
Here's my code:
"type": "text",
"size": "2rem",
"alignment": "center",
"content": "Item 1\n Item 2 \n Item 3"
I've done a pretty big dive in the grammar as well as on google trouble shooting JSON, and I've tried various things, but with no luck.
This is mostly because it looks much better in presentation (and I do think it's more approachable). If there's no way to get the list vertical rather than horizontal, it isn't the end of the world, but I thought I'd better ask. Again- apologies if this is very obvious and thank you for your help!]]> Item1
Item2
Item3
Participants are told to memorize the three items before continuing. However, I keep getting the following, horizontal display instead:
Item 1 Item 2 Item 3
Here's my code:
"type": "text",
"size": "2rem",
"alignment": "center",
"content": "Item 1\n Item 2 \n Item 3"
I've done a pretty big dive in the grammar as well as on google trouble shooting JSON, and I've tried various things, but with no luck.
This is mostly because it looks much better in presentation (and I do think it's more approachable). If there's no way to get the list vertical rather than horizontal, it isn't the end of the world, but I thought I'd better ask. Again- apologies if this is very obvious and thank you for your help!]]> <![CDATA[Jumping Position of my Stimuli]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=813 Wed, 07 May 2025 15:09:32 +0000 visto2001]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=813
I’m currently building an experiment in FindingFive that combines aspects of the Stroop and Flanker tasks. In this setup, I need to display two stimuli side by side—one on the left and one on the right. It’s crucial that these stimuli stay fixed in their positions throughout the experiment to avoid any visual shifts that might affect participants’ attention or reaction times.

I’ve already tried using the "location" and "fixed_location" options, and the positioning looks almost right. However, I’m still seeing a slight “jumping” or shifting of the text stimuli between trials, which is a problem for the design.

Does anyone know how to make sure the stimuli remain completely stable in their assigned left/right positions across all trials?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks so much in advance!

Best,
Vivienne

Here is my code from my trial template so far:

{
"match":{
"type":"basic",
"stimuli":[
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "GRÜN_blau_match"], "location": [4, 6]},
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "ROT_blau_match"], "location": [4, 6],
"fixed_location": true}],
"stimulus_pattern":{"order":"fixed"},
"responses":["response_matching"], "location":[8]
},

"mismatch":{
"type":"basic",
"stimuli": [
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "GELB_lila_mismatch"], "location": [4, 6]},
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "ROT_grün_mismatch"], "location": [4, 6],
"fixed_location": true}],
"stimulus_pattern":{"order":"fixed"},
"responses":["response_matching"]
}

}]]>
I’m currently building an experiment in FindingFive that combines aspects of the Stroop and Flanker tasks. In this setup, I need to display two stimuli side by side—one on the left and one on the right. It’s crucial that these stimuli stay fixed in their positions throughout the experiment to avoid any visual shifts that might affect participants’ attention or reaction times.

I’ve already tried using the "location" and "fixed_location" options, and the positioning looks almost right. However, I’m still seeing a slight “jumping” or shifting of the text stimuli between trials, which is a problem for the design.

Does anyone know how to make sure the stimuli remain completely stable in their assigned left/right positions across all trials?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks so much in advance!

Best,
Vivienne

Here is my code from my trial template so far:

{
"match":{
"type":"basic",
"stimuli":[
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "GRÜN_blau_match"], "location": [4, 6]},
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "ROT_blau_match"], "location": [4, 6],
"fixed_location": true}],
"stimulus_pattern":{"order":"fixed"},
"responses":["response_matching"], "location":[8]
},

"mismatch":{
"type":"basic",
"stimuli": [
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "GELB_lila_mismatch"], "location": [4, 6]},
{"which": ["BLAU_black", "ROT_grün_mismatch"], "location": [4, 6],
"fixed_location": true}],
"stimulus_pattern":{"order":"fixed"},
"responses":["response_matching"]
}

}]]> <![CDATA[New instructions on second iteration]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=731 Wed, 08 May 2024 17:36:49 +0000 HF2021]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=731 When using iterations with the accuracy method, if a participant fails the first try, they are taken back to the instructions just prior to the start of the first try. Is there a way to give them new instructions after the first fail and before the second try, for example, something like: "Oops! You failed the test. Lets try again."?
Thank you!]]> When using iterations with the accuracy method, if a participant fails the first try, they are taken back to the instructions just prior to the start of the first try. Is there a way to give them new instructions after the first fail and before the second try, for example, something like: "Oops! You failed the test. Lets try again."?
Thank you!]]> <![CDATA[pseudorandomization multiple attributes]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=729 Wed, 17 Apr 2024 05:02:42 +0000 blueorange]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=729 For example, is there a way to limit the occurrence of both attributes "aaaa" and "bbbb" showing up?
I tried both of these codes but none of them worked Sad

"stimulus_pattern": {"order": "pseudorandom",
"attribute": "a", "b",
"min_N": 1, "max_N": 3}

"stimulus_pattern": {"order": "pseudorandom",
"attribute": "a",
"attribute": "b",
"min_N": 1, "max_N": 3}]]> For example, is there a way to limit the occurrence of both attributes "aaaa" and "bbbb" showing up?
I tried both of these codes but none of them worked Sad

"stimulus_pattern": {"order": "pseudorandom",
"attribute": "a", "b",
"min_N": 1, "max_N": 3}

"stimulus_pattern": {"order": "pseudorandom",
"attribute": "a",
"attribute": "b",
"min_N": 1, "max_N": 3}]]> <![CDATA[Cookie Error in MTurk]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=722 Fri, 05 Apr 2024 17:40:06 +0000 finley]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=722 The Preview of the study in FF works fine, though.

.jpg

MTurkSanboxError.jpg (Size: 156.54 KB / Downloads: 4) ]]> The Preview of the study in FF works fine, though.

.jpg

MTurkSanboxError.jpg (Size: 156.54 KB / Downloads: 4) ]]> <![CDATA[150 trial limit]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=720 Tue, 19 Mar 2024 14:34:46 +0000 sac429]]> http://discuss.findingfive.com/showthread.php?tid=720
I'm receiving an error that says the trials in block "preview_sentence_choice_production" exceed the upper limit of 150.

Code:
    "preview_sentence_choice_production": {

      "trial_templates": ["preview_template","sentence_template","choice_template","production_template"],

    "pattern": {"order": "alternate_random", "repeat": 1}

}

Our study aims to have 72 sentences and 4 stimuli per sentence (2 text stimuli, 2 images), resulting in 288 trials according to FF.

Based on an older post in the forum, I see that there is a way to increase the maximum allowed trials. Would it be okay to add "max_trials: 300" or would this affect the performance of the study/be unideal for FF's servers?

We may also break this block up into 2 blocks (144 trials each), which will be under the 150 limit, but I just wanted to know if increasing the max trials was a feasible option.

Thank you for your assistance!
Serena]]>
I'm receiving an error that says the trials in block "preview_sentence_choice_production" exceed the upper limit of 150.

Code:
    "preview_sentence_choice_production": {

      "trial_templates": ["preview_template","sentence_template","choice_template","production_template"],

    "pattern": {"order": "alternate_random", "repeat": 1}

}