Re: [Heartlogic-dev] comments on story rating thing

[Joshua N Pritikin]

On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 02:29 -0500, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> Instead of saying...
> 
> Story
> 
> Jack and Jill went up the hill
> 
> to fetch a pale of water
> 
> Understood As
> 
> Jack wants something about a pale of water for himself.
> 
> ....say....
> 
> Story
> 
> Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pale of water
> 
> Understood As
> 
> Jack wants something about a pale of water for himself.

Yah, I had that on my TODO list.  Thanks for the nudge.

> Also don't say "Most experts agree."  Say most "humans" (too nerdy or
> nerdy chic??) or "of our research participants" or "of our
> volunteers."

Changed.

> Also don't say...
> 
> The statistics above represent the combined ratings of everyone who
> has rated this appraisal.  Following standard APA notation, N is the
> number of samples, M is the average on a scale of -1.0 (highly
> unbelievable) to 1.0 (highly believable), and SD is the standard
> deviation.
> 
> ...first of all no need to say this is APA standard notation.

Removed.

>   second,
> do it however we do it for "Vienna is wet." and friends (i.e. the
> rumination story).

OK, maybe, but I want to let them diverge for a while.  It's more
creative.  ;-)

> ...also don't say...
> 
> Understood As
> 
> Jill is indifferent about a pale of water for herself.
> 
> ...say....
> 
> After reading this story HAL thinks that:
> 
>       Jill is indifferent about a pale of water for herself.
> 
> How correct is HAL?
> 
> ...and have not believability ratings but correctness ratings, a la...
> 
>       Completely Incorrect
>       Slighly Incorrect
>       So So
>       Slightly Correct
>       Completely Correct
> 
> [except presented horizontally]

Wow, uh, seems like a good idea.  Give me a day or two to digest it.

> ...ALSO THIS SEEMS LIKE AN IMPORTANT SUGGESTIONS this kinda makes more
> sense if the participant saw them grouped meaningfully.  E.g. like
> so...
> 
>       Jill is indifferent about a pale of water for herself.  1 2 3 4 5
>       Jack is indifferent about a pale of water for herself.  1 2 3 4 5
>       Jill thinks that Jack is indifferent about a pale of water for herself. 
> 1 2 3 4 5
>       Jack thinks that Jill is indifferent about a pale of water for herself. 
> 1 2 3 4 5
> 
> ....Whuddyasay to that?

I don't think that works as well as shuffling all the questions
together.  Here are some reasons off the top of my head:

* What if an impatient web surfer only answers half of the questions?

* It gets monotonous.

* Reliability might suffer because the order that the questions are
presented might have some affect on the ratings.

> One more suggestion...
> 
> For the rumination Vienna is wet study, the type in boxes where we ask
> them to comment, can you pretty please with sugar on top put it
> *below* the radio buttons?  Also ...

Done, but I want our team of useability testers to squint at this before
I am convinced that it is the one true best way.

> Do you have any comments about the truth of this statement
> 
> ...would be better as this....
> 
> Feel free to add any comments about the believability of this
> statement or about your rating right here.
> 
> ...and maybe just "any comments" after the first 3 items.

Done.

> See this would be another great place for a wiki.

I'm not convinced.

-- 
If you are an American then support http://fairtax.org
 (Permanently replace 50,000+ pages of tax law with about 200 pages.)

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part