Batch file with different surveys in different conditions - weird output


Author
Message
mongrel
mongrel
Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 53, Visits: 147

Hello supreme beings,

 in our work group, weencountered a rather peculiar problem. I’ll try my best to explain the complexsituation.

We programmed aseveral experiments that were combined in a batch file. Part of this batch weredifferent kinds of surveys that should be shown in different conditions. Seethe batch file in the following:

<batch>

/subjects = (1 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming AGE_RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OWposYMneg_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

…In a similar way the part above repeats forsubjects 2, 3, & 4. Only, the priming condition and the EC conditionchange. What stays the same is the before last file:  

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx".

 

In the next 4 conditions (5, 6, 7, & 8),this file is changed into:

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", see below:

 

<batch>

/subjects = (8 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming GENDER_ RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OMnegYWpos_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

 

I checked bothexperimental files: "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"and "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", and both contain thecorrect set of variables. Therefore, subject numbers 1-4 should view and answeronly items of "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx", while subjects 5-8 shouldview and answer only items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx".

The data, however,look very different. First of all, I get one file for both experiments, althoughthat is not the case in the other experimental parts that are not surveys. Butthat is probably normal and wouldn’t be a problem in itself. Second, suddenlyin the data subject 7 for example has provided answers for the items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx" which she shouldn’t have seen, also there isno data for the items of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx",although subject 7 should have viewed and answered only those. Altogether,there are only 28 (of 210) subjects that seem to have provided answers to theitems of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", while all othersubjects seem to have answered the items of: "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx". This seems quite unsystematic and I do notunderstand how that could have happened.

Below, I have posted ascreenshot (cut together, because it was too long J). You can see subjects 1-8. All except 2 and 6have provided answers to CA_OW3 for example, although only subjects 1-4 shouldhave been able to answer that item…

 

 

My questions: howcould this happen? Did the subjects really end up in the wrong conditions andwhy is that so? Or are the answers to the items simply saved under the wrongvariable name?

I know, it is acomplex problem, but I am at a loss here and would be grateful for your help!

Thanx,

M.

 

 

 


Dave
Dave
Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)
Group: Administrators
Posts: 10K, Visits: 58K
mongrel - Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Hello supreme beings,

 in our work group, weencountered a rather peculiar problem. I’ll try my best to explain the complexsituation.

We programmed aseveral experiments that were combined in a batch file. Part of this batch weredifferent kinds of surveys that should be shown in different conditions. Seethe batch file in the following:

<batch>

/subjects = (1 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming AGE_RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OWposYMneg_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

…In a similar way the part above repeats forsubjects 2, 3, & 4. Only, the priming condition and the EC conditionchange. What stays the same is the before last file:  

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx".

 

In the next 4 conditions (5, 6, 7, & 8),this file is changed into:

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", see below:

 

<batch>

/subjects = (8 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming GENDER_ RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OMnegYWpos_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

 

I checked bothexperimental files: "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"and "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", and both contain thecorrect set of variables. Therefore, subject numbers 1-4 should view and answeronly items of "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx", while subjects 5-8 shouldview and answer only items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx".

The data, however,look very different. First of all, I get one file for both experiments, althoughthat is not the case in the other experimental parts that are not surveys. Butthat is probably normal and wouldn’t be a problem in itself. Second, suddenlyin the data subject 7 for example has provided answers for the items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx" which she shouldn’t have seen, also there isno data for the items of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx",although subject 7 should have viewed and answered only those. Altogether,there are only 28 (of 210) subjects that seem to have provided answers to theitems of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", while all othersubjects seem to have answered the items of: "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx". This seems quite unsystematic and I do notunderstand how that could have happened.

Below, I have posted ascreenshot (cut together, because it was too long J). You can see subjects 1-8. All except 2 and 6have provided answers to CA_OW3 for example, although only subjects 1-4 shouldhave been able to answer that item…

 

 

My questions: howcould this happen? Did the subjects really end up in the wrong conditions andwhy is that so? Or are the answers to the items simply saved under the wrongvariable name?

I know, it is acomplex problem, but I am at a loss here and would be grateful for your help!

Thanx,

M.

 

 

 


> My questions: howcould this happen?

This is impossible to answer without the actual files.

mongrel
mongrel
Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 53, Visits: 147
Dave - Tuesday, February 7, 2017
mongrel - Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Hello supreme beings,

 in our work group, weencountered a rather peculiar problem. I’ll try my best to explain the complexsituation.

We programmed aseveral experiments that were combined in a batch file. Part of this batch weredifferent kinds of surveys that should be shown in different conditions. Seethe batch file in the following:

<batch>

/subjects = (1 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming AGE_RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OWposYMneg_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

…In a similar way the part above repeats forsubjects 2, 3, & 4. Only, the priming condition and the EC conditionchange. What stays the same is the before last file:  

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx".

 

In the next 4 conditions (5, 6, 7, & 8),this file is changed into:

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", see below:

 

<batch>

/subjects = (8 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming GENDER_ RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OMnegYWpos_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

 

I checked bothexperimental files: "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"and "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", and both contain thecorrect set of variables. Therefore, subject numbers 1-4 should view and answeronly items of "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx", while subjects 5-8 shouldview and answer only items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx".

The data, however,look very different. First of all, I get one file for both experiments, althoughthat is not the case in the other experimental parts that are not surveys. Butthat is probably normal and wouldn’t be a problem in itself. Second, suddenlyin the data subject 7 for example has provided answers for the items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx" which she shouldn’t have seen, also there isno data for the items of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx",although subject 7 should have viewed and answered only those. Altogether,there are only 28 (of 210) subjects that seem to have provided answers to theitems of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", while all othersubjects seem to have answered the items of: "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx". This seems quite unsystematic and I do notunderstand how that could have happened.

Below, I have posted ascreenshot (cut together, because it was too long J). You can see subjects 1-8. All except 2 and 6have provided answers to CA_OW3 for example, although only subjects 1-4 shouldhave been able to answer that item…

 

 

My questions: howcould this happen? Did the subjects really end up in the wrong conditions andwhy is that so? Or are the answers to the items simply saved under the wrongvariable name?

I know, it is acomplex problem, but I am at a loss here and would be grateful for your help!

Thanx,

M.

 

 

 


> My questions: howcould this happen?

This is impossible to answer without the actual files.



Attachments
161206Exp5_Batch_RB.iqx (479 views, 3.00 KB)
161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx (466 views, 24.00 KB)
161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx (509 views, 24.00 KB)
Dave
Dave
Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)
Group: Administrators
Posts: 10K, Visits: 58K
mongrel - Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Dave - Tuesday, February 7, 2017
mongrel - Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Hello supreme beings,

 in our work group, weencountered a rather peculiar problem. I’ll try my best to explain the complexsituation.

We programmed aseveral experiments that were combined in a batch file. Part of this batch weredifferent kinds of surveys that should be shown in different conditions. Seethe batch file in the following:

<batch>

/subjects = (1 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming AGE_RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OWposYMneg_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

…In a similar way the part above repeats forsubjects 2, 3, & 4. Only, the priming condition and the EC conditionchange. What stays the same is the before last file:  

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx".

 

In the next 4 conditions (5, 6, 7, & 8),this file is changed into:

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", see below:

 

<batch>

/subjects = (8 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming GENDER_ RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OMnegYWpos_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

 

I checked bothexperimental files: "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"and "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", and both contain thecorrect set of variables. Therefore, subject numbers 1-4 should view and answeronly items of "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx", while subjects 5-8 shouldview and answer only items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx".

The data, however,look very different. First of all, I get one file for both experiments, althoughthat is not the case in the other experimental parts that are not surveys. Butthat is probably normal and wouldn’t be a problem in itself. Second, suddenlyin the data subject 7 for example has provided answers for the items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx" which she shouldn’t have seen, also there isno data for the items of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx",although subject 7 should have viewed and answered only those. Altogether,there are only 28 (of 210) subjects that seem to have provided answers to theitems of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", while all othersubjects seem to have answered the items of: "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx". This seems quite unsystematic and I do notunderstand how that could have happened.

Below, I have posted ascreenshot (cut together, because it was too long J). You can see subjects 1-8. All except 2 and 6have provided answers to CA_OW3 for example, although only subjects 1-4 shouldhave been able to answer that item…

 

 

My questions: howcould this happen? Did the subjects really end up in the wrong conditions andwhy is that so? Or are the answers to the items simply saved under the wrongvariable name?

I know, it is acomplex problem, but I am at a loss here and would be grateful for your help!

Thanx,

M.

 

 

 


> My questions: howcould this happen?

This is impossible to answer without the actual files.



> First of all, I get one file for both experiments, althoughthat is not the case in the other experimental parts that are not surveys.

Yes, that's because surveys record data differently than regular blocks (surveys: wide format vs blocks: long format). The name of the survey data file is determined by the *name* of the <survey> element, and since that name is identical in both "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx"

<survey Frageboegen>
/ pages = [1 = Intro; 2 = Demographie; 3 = CA1; 4-9 = noreplace(CA_FocalOM1, CA_FocalOM2, CA_FocalOM3,
CA_FocalYW1, CA_FocalYW2, CA_FocalYW3);
10 = NFC1; 11 = NFC2; 12 = PFC1; 13 = PFC2; 14 = PFC3; 15 = Worumgings]
/ nextlabel = "Weiter"
/ nextbuttonposition = (50, 90)
/ showbackbutton = false
/ showpagenumbers = false
</survey>

and "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"

<survey Frageboegen>
/ pages = [1 = Intro; 2 = Demographie; 3 = CA1; 4-9 = noreplace(CA_FocalOW1, CA_FocalOW2, CA_FocalOW3,
CA_FocalYM1, CA_FocalYM2, CA_FocalYM3);
10 = NFC1; 11 = NFC2; 12 = PFC1; 13 = PFC2; 14 = PFC3; 15 = Worumgings]
/ nextlabel = "Weiter"
/ nextbuttonposition = (50, 90)
/ showbackbutton = false
/ showpagenumbers = false
</survey>

they end up in the same file.



Dave
Dave
Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)
Group: Administrators
Posts: 10K, Visits: 58K
Dave - Tuesday, February 7, 2017
mongrel - Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Dave - Tuesday, February 7, 2017
mongrel - Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Hello supreme beings,

 in our work group, weencountered a rather peculiar problem. I’ll try my best to explain the complexsituation.

We programmed aseveral experiments that were combined in a batch file. Part of this batch weredifferent kinds of surveys that should be shown in different conditions. Seethe batch file in the following:

<batch>

/subjects = (1 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming AGE_RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OWposYMneg_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

…In a similar way the part above repeats forsubjects 2, 3, & 4. Only, the priming condition and the EC conditionchange. What stays the same is the before last file:  

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx".

 

In the next 4 conditions (5, 6, 7, & 8),this file is changed into:

"161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", see below:

 

<batch>

/subjects = (8 of 8)

/file ="161206Exp5_Consentform_RB.iqx"

/file = "161103Exp5_ Priming GENDER_ RB.iqx"

/file = "161205Exp5_ EC_OMnegYWpos_RB.iqx"

/file = "161208Exp5_ Explizite Abfrage_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file = "161206Exp5_AMP_V3_RL.iqx"

/file = "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx"

/file ="161206Exp5_End_RB.iqx"

/ groupassignment =subjectnumber

</batch>

 

I checked bothexperimental files: "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"and "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", and both contain thecorrect set of variables. Therefore, subject numbers 1-4 should view and answeronly items of "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx", while subjects 5-8 shouldview and answer only items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx".

The data, however,look very different. First of all, I get one file for both experiments, althoughthat is not the case in the other experimental parts that are not surveys. Butthat is probably normal and wouldn’t be a problem in itself. Second, suddenlyin the data subject 7 for example has provided answers for the items of "161209Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx" which she shouldn’t have seen, also there isno data for the items of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx",although subject 7 should have viewed and answered only those. Altogether,there are only 28 (of 210) subjects that seem to have provided answers to theitems of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", while all othersubjects seem to have answered the items of: "161209 Exp5_Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx". This seems quite unsystematic and I do notunderstand how that could have happened.

Below, I have posted ascreenshot (cut together, because it was too long J). You can see subjects 1-8. All except 2 and 6have provided answers to CA_OW3 for example, although only subjects 1-4 shouldhave been able to answer that item…

 

 

My questions: howcould this happen? Did the subjects really end up in the wrong conditions andwhy is that so? Or are the answers to the items simply saved under the wrongvariable name?

I know, it is acomplex problem, but I am at a loss here and would be grateful for your help!

Thanx,

M.

 

 

 


> My questions: howcould this happen?

This is impossible to answer without the actual files.



> First of all, I get one file for both experiments, althoughthat is not the case in the other experimental parts that are not surveys.

Yes, that's because surveys record data differently than regular blocks (surveys: wide format vs blocks: long format). The name of the survey data file is determined by the *name* of the <survey> element, and since that name is identical in both "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx"

<survey Frageboegen>
/ pages = [1 = Intro; 2 = Demographie; 3 = CA1; 4-9 = noreplace(CA_FocalOM1, CA_FocalOM2, CA_FocalOM3,
CA_FocalYW1, CA_FocalYW2, CA_FocalYW3);
10 = NFC1; 11 = NFC2; 12 = PFC1; 13 = PFC2; 14 = PFC3; 15 = Worumgings]
/ nextlabel = "Weiter"
/ nextbuttonposition = (50, 90)
/ showbackbutton = false
/ showpagenumbers = false
</survey>

and "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx"

<survey Frageboegen>
/ pages = [1 = Intro; 2 = Demographie; 3 = CA1; 4-9 = noreplace(CA_FocalOW1, CA_FocalOW2, CA_FocalOW3,
CA_FocalYM1, CA_FocalYM2, CA_FocalYM3);
10 = NFC1; 11 = NFC2; 12 = PFC1; 13 = PFC2; 14 = PFC3; 15 = Worumgings]
/ nextlabel = "Weiter"
/ nextbuttonposition = (50, 90)
/ showbackbutton = false
/ showpagenumbers = false
</survey>

they end up in the same file.



That, then, explains the problem. The column names do *not* necessarily reflect what version of <survey frageboegen> the participant was administered. Take the attached data file as an example. The first row (subject # 5) is from a run-through of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OMYW_RB.iqx", and that's what the column names reflect. The 2nd row (subject # 1) is from a run-through of "161209 Exp5_ Fragebögen_OWYM_RB.iqx".

Attachments
Frageboegen_survey.iqdat (446 views, 2.00 KB)
mongrel
mongrel
Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 53, Visits: 147
Hi Dave,

thank you for the quick response! I thought, it might be that. However, I was confused because with all other file types, Inquisit simply uses the name of the file, and only in survey files, it seems to take the name out of the code.

One last question:
My next step would be to reorder the output file by hand. Can I be sure that the order of the variables stayed the same and the set of variables is simply shifted?

Thank you again and have a good day!
Kind regards,
M.

Dave
Dave
Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)
Group: Administrators
Posts: 10K, Visits: 58K
mongrel - Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Hi Dave,

thank you for the quick response! I thought, it might be that. However, I was confused because with all other file types, Inquisit simply uses the name of the file, and only in survey files, it seems to take the name out of the code.

One last question:
My next step would be to reorder the output file by hand. Can I be sure that the order of the variables stayed the same and the set of variables is simply shifted?

Thank you again and have a good day!
Kind regards,
M.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "reorder the output file by hand." Can you elaborate, please?

Dave
Dave
Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)Supreme Being (830K reputation)
Group: Administrators
Posts: 10K, Visits: 58K
Dave - Wednesday, February 8, 2017
mongrel - Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Hi Dave,

thank you for the quick response! I thought, it might be that. However, I was confused because with all other file types, Inquisit simply uses the name of the file, and only in survey files, it seems to take the name out of the code.

One last question:
My next step would be to reorder the output file by hand. Can I be sure that the order of the variables stayed the same and the set of variables is simply shifted?

Thank you again and have a good day!
Kind regards,
M.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "reorder the output file by hand." Can you elaborate, please?

> Can I be sure that the order of the variables stayed the same and the set of variables is simply shifted?

Speculating a bit here, but I suspect you're asking whether the there's a 1:1 correspondence between the columns / logged responses in both versions. The answer is yes. So, taking the previous example data file



The CA_OM1 column reflects the 2nd subjects response to CA_OW1, the CA_OM2 column corresponds to CA_OW2, and so forth.

mongrel
mongrel
Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)Distinguished Member (4.1K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 53, Visits: 147
Exactly!
Thanks a bunch!

GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Reading This Topic

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search