Serious Problem!
Serious Problem!
When I select 'My Profile' I no longer get a detailed record of my present performance against the baseline, the table is blank!
More concerning is that when I checked my stats for the individual tests some of them e.g reaction time, Stroop, Flanker...showed data a few hours old when I have'nt practiced these for weeks! Whose data is this? Consequently my profile performance has reduced. I do hope you can resolve! A small point-the profile is now colourless.
I do hope you can return my stats and profile to the correct values!
A great site!
More concerning is that when I checked my stats for the individual tests some of them e.g reaction time, Stroop, Flanker...showed data a few hours old when I have'nt practiced these for weeks! Whose data is this? Consequently my profile performance has reduced. I do hope you can resolve! A small point-the profile is now colourless.
I do hope you can return my stats and profile to the correct values!
A great site!
onetaste | 4 years ago
Reply
I've just compared the mysterious stats in My Profile e.g. 'My reaction time stats' with those listed showing various users scores for the same task and they match up! Therfore my individual profile is taking in stats from all users! This will help you resolve the problem!
You must be a busy!
Regards
You must be a busy!
Regards
onetaste | 4 years ago
Reply
Thank you very much. You are absolutely right: the My Stats page forgot to exclude everyone else's results! This has been fixed.
cognitivefun | 4 years ago
Reply
Thank you!
However, I have noticed that my presesent performance ratings are lower, particularly on working memory. I now have 4 tests with a negative performance i.e. in the red. This was not the case 17 hours ago. Has the baseline measurement changed? If not is it possible to return these ratings to their state prior to this blip?
Regards
However, I have noticed that my presesent performance ratings are lower, particularly on working memory. I now have 4 tests with a negative performance i.e. in the red. This was not the case 17 hours ago. Has the baseline measurement changed? If not is it possible to return these ratings to their state prior to this blip?
Regards
onetaste | 4 years ago
Reply
Thank you again for noticing. Your profile has been updated; if you are interested, Here's an update on what happened.
First of all, yes, the measurement has changed. The numbers for the n-back tests are now approximated "n-levels." While you can still use adjusted reaction time as a measurement, it may be easier to just compare fluctuations in adjusted n-levels. Your graph will not be affected though.
As for the negative numbers, I made a mistake by taking the average of everything, as opposed to more recent submissions, which results in the your numbers being pulled down (and slow to change). The n-level in your profile should change every time you take the test. As you can see, the reference is slightly under 2-back. So once you become fluent with the 3-back setup you should be comfortably in the "green."
First of all, yes, the measurement has changed. The numbers for the n-back tests are now approximated "n-levels." While you can still use adjusted reaction time as a measurement, it may be easier to just compare fluctuations in adjusted n-levels. Your graph will not be affected though.
As for the negative numbers, I made a mistake by taking the average of everything, as opposed to more recent submissions, which results in the your numbers being pulled down (and slow to change). The n-level in your profile should change every time you take the test. As you can see, the reference is slightly under 2-back. So once you become fluent with the 3-back setup you should be comfortably in the "green."
cognitivefun | 4 years ago
Reply
Thank You!
I'm still not clear on how you are calculating approximated "n-levels" and what constitutes fluency at a particular level.
One point that comes to mind is - are all trials included in the calculation even if the trial is aborted part way through? For example take a typical run consisting of 20 trials, sometimes I may get disturbed or my brain may be frazzled and I will abort the run, say after 8 trials to recompose myself and then start a new run? Are these 8 trials included, and if so how?
Great Site
Regards
I'm still not clear on how you are calculating approximated "n-levels" and what constitutes fluency at a particular level.
One point that comes to mind is - are all trials included in the calculation even if the trial is aborted part way through? For example take a typical run consisting of 20 trials, sometimes I may get disturbed or my brain may be frazzled and I will abort the run, say after 8 trials to recompose myself and then start a new run? Are these 8 trials included, and if so how?
Great Site
Regards
onetaste | 4 years ago
Reply
"are all trials included in the calculation even if the trial is aborted part way through? For example take a typical run consisting of 20 trials, sometimes I may get disturbed or my brain may be frazzled and I will abort the run, say after 8 trials to recompose myself and then start a new run? Are these 8 trials included, and if so how?"
If you continue the test until it says "session complete," then everything is included. If you abort (which means reloading the page), then the aborted trials are not counted.
cognitivefun | 4 years ago
Reply
onetaste | 4 years ago
Reply
"I'm still not clear on how you are calculating approximated "n-levels" and what constitutes fluency at a particular level. "
This one is simple: it's the average of the last 3 submissions, adjusted by your score (% correct). Fluency depends. Generally, above chance level (50%) is enough to indicate something (skill acquisition, learning, or something else). Usually I would consider above 85% to be "fluent."
cognitivefun | 4 years ago
Reply
onetaste | 4 years ago
Reply
My performance graph has not been graced by the famous green pentagon today.
I've also noticed the change in performance ratings.
I've also noticed the change in performance ratings.
cevapcici | 4 years ago
Reply
