Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Square Sequence Recall

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Thank you for your fast reply, as always. Your guidance was very helpful in getting me back on track. In the experimental package I have attached, you can see that the first 6 trials have been created. There are two noticeable issues that must be ironed out in order to finally complete the task, as creating the trials themselves have been more or less a breeze so far (although some amendments may need to be made in order to fix the issues I am about to describe).

    1) The feedback screen "Thank you for your participation" seems to play twice following the Recall Matrix (the "Both" Practice Trial seems to be the best trial to display this error). This seems to be due it playing once through our established Recall Block Rules, and again as the Feedback Block plays following the Wait for Click Trial; however, if I were to remove the rule and have only the Feedback Block play sequentially after the Wait for Click portion, the task does not progress to the next trial. Is there a way around this issue?

    2) When I copied the Trials pertaining to the Recall matrix (Recall Matrix, Labels, Wait for Click, etc., I have seen that despite the identical logic from the practice matrix from which is was copied, the matrix in Both and Trial 1-6 skip forward to the feedback screen upon initial click into the matrix; however, when playing the block by itself, the matrix is fully interactive as intended and progresses forward as anticipated. Is this due to the position of the Rules Reset Trial? I am unsure of what could be causing this issue outside of the Recall Block, which seems to work perfectly, indicating that it is not an issue of the matrix's rules of the trials within the selected block.

    As always, thank you for your continued patience and support.

    Emily
    Attached Files

    Comment


    • #17
      Here is the updated experimental package for the task, with all trials completed and more descriptive item titles. I hope the added detail helps.
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #18
        Sorry to keep you waiting. Both (1) and (2) turn out to have relatively simple answers -- or rather, answers that are easy to explain, at least. So that's good!

        (1) It seems like in your latest copy of the experiment, somebody already figured out how to prevent the "Thank you" slide from appearing twice in a row. In an older copy of the experiment, the problem was that a Trial Rule (in the Trial Editor) named "If All Completed" contained two actions, and one of the actions was to present "Thank you." I would have recommended simply deleting that action (but keeping the rest of the rule as-is). However, it seems like in the latest copy, somebody did that! Which is great. Congratulations on solving that.

        (2) Here is the reason why the recall matrix wants to "give up" right away (in all but the first appearance of the matrix): it "gives up" because nothing is ever setting the parameter "Count Recall Session" back to zero. Making sure this counter goes back to zero just prior to each new recall session will fix the problem. Why? Answer: because all the block rules with names like "Recall Sessions Are Done..." are examining that counter, treating it like a flag to signal an exit from the recall matrix. Thankfully, there is a very easy one-step fix for this. In the trial editor, go to the rule named "Reset Parameter (Part 2)" and add a new action to the list of actions. The new action is "Reset: Count Recall Session".

        There is a general technique that I find helpful for problems like (2). Save the data when you run the experiment, and then examine the columns in the datafile that track the parameters. If you notice that a parameter "gets stuck", then that might tell you where to begin investigating. In the present example, when I looked at the data column for "Count Recall Session", I noticed that it went from 0 to 1 just as the practice matrix block ended, and then the value stayed stuck at 1 from that point onward.

        (Of course, not all "stuck" values will be wrong. Sometimes you can have an experiment that is designed to stop manipulating a counter at some known point in the experiment.)

        Also, once you notice something is "stuck", you have to consider your particular experiment to know whether resetting the counter to 0 is the proper fix, or whether we perhaps need to "unstick" the value by incrementing it even higher and keep it counting upwards.

        Hopefully learning to read the parameter columns in the output can lead to insights for many future experiments.

        Comment

        Working...
        X