The jspsych-demos from nivlab

add funding agency info

This development of this software was supported in part by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), a component of the National Institute of Health (NIH), under award number UL1TR003017.

add vocabulary size / word familiarity tests

for details, see:

modernize imports / load jsPsych from unpkg

Use unpkg to load jsPsych library and plugins. This has two main advantages: (1) simplify the code base by getting rid of the local copy of jsPsych; (2) easier maintenance by simply updating the required library/plugin versions.

update consent form

measuring gender

Background

This issue came to my (@szorowi1) attention in two separate events. First, I saw independent Twitter threads from Dr. Sebastian Barr and Dr. Sean Mackinnon on the importance of properly measuring and studying gender effects in scientific research. Second, I have been butting up against challenges with how we are collecting gender information (described below) when conducting measurement invariance analyses.

Motivation

In our current demographics form, we assess gender with a single item, What is your gender?, that has four response options:

Man
Woman
Rather not stay
Other [free response box]

This item is inclusive to the extent that (1) we use proper gender terms (i.e. "man" & "woman", not "male" & "female"); (2) we allow participants to self-define their gender if they are uncomfortable with either label; and (3) we allow participants to not report this information at all if they are uncomfortable with doing so.

However, there is a critical issue with the phrasing of this item. Specifically, the phrasing of this item does not distinguish between cisgender and transgender individuals (unless they self-elect to disclose a non-cisgender identity). This is problematic for several reasons, briefly outlined below (for detailed discussion, see Bauer et al. 2017; Fraser, 2018; Cameron & Stinson, 2019):

Undercounting transgender participants is erasure. By failing to accurately measure (and report) the proportion of transgender participants in our samples, we are implicitly expunging their participation in and contributions to our studies.
Measurement noise and participant burden. By failing to make the intentions of our gender item more clear, we are putting additional burden on our transgender participants. That is, we are leaving to them the choice whether to disclose their transgender identity or not. In some sense, this item is therefore less fair. Moreover, it creates measurement noise for the reason cited above.
Threats to study validity. As noted by Cameron & Stinson (2019), "incorrectly recording a person's gender is statistically tantamount to incorrectly recording a participant's experimental condition, a serious error that attenuates observed effects." Moreover, failing to measure gender properly prohibits us for accurately investigating important gender effects (e.g. mental health in marginalized and oppressed communities).

A second, no-less-serious issue is that, at present, our only response option for nonbinary participants is the "other" category. Though it is good that we allow participants to self-define their gender identity, using the specific word "other" may be offensive or insulting to those participants, as it implicitly reinforces a gender binary.

How to measure gender

Fortunately, there has been ample research and discussion on the topic of how to inclusively and validly measure gender (and sex). On DEAR day (2022-11-07), I reviewed multiple manuscripts and resources on the topic. Most authors recommend variations of a two-item approach, which I reproduce below. The two-item approach measures both sex and gender, thereby resolving the ambiguity of a standalone gender identity item. Furthermore, all authors recommend a separate response for nonbinary / genderfluid participants.

TransHub Australia

TransHub Australia, a digital information and resource platform for all trans and gender diverse people in New South Wales, recommends the following two items:

How would you describe your gender?
- Man or male
- Woman or female
- Non-binary
- I use a different term [free response]
- Prefer not to answer
At birth, you were recorded as:
- Male
- Female
- Another term [free response]
- Prefer not to answer

Bauer et al. (2017)

Bauer et al. (2017) recommend the following two items:

What sex were you assigned at birth, meaning on your original birth certificate?
- Male
- Female
Which best describes your current gender identity?
- Man
- Woman
- Non-binary
- Indigenous or other cultural gender identity minority (e.g. two-spirit)
- Something else (e.g. gender-fluid, nonbinary)

The authors are writing in the context of investigating gender in the general population of Canada, hence the recommendation of additional response options for Indigenous peoples. The authors also suggest an optional third item:

What gender do you currently live in your day-to-day life?
- Man
- Woman
- Sometimes man, sometimes woman
- Something other than man or woman

Fraser (2018)

Fraser (2018) recommends the following two items:

What is your gender identity?
- [Free response]
What sex was documented at birth on your original birth certificate?
- Male
- Female

Recommend changes

After reviewing reading these papers, my current recommendation is to adopt something similar to the TransHub items:

How would you describe your gender?
- Man
- Woman
- Non-binary
- I use a different term [free response]
- Prefer not to answer
What sex were you assigned at birth, meaning on your birth certificate?
- Male
- Female
- Another term [free response]
- Prefer not to answer

Though I recognize the free-response approach recommended by Fraser (2018) provides the most freedom to participants, it also requires more work of researchers in our lab and increases the possibility of accidentally misgendering participants (i.e. when coding their responses).

Conclusion

If the above seems reasonable to the lab, I will make the recommended changes to our demographics form.

Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS)

jspsych-v7.0+

Objective

Convert all jspsych tasks from v6.3 to 7.0+

Sub-goals

update gender question in demographics form

update categories to "Man" and "Woman"

updates to consent form (2023 feb)

add self-report questionnaires

consent form updates (2022, Dec)

Recent changes were made to the online experiments IRB (11986) that require changes to the Niv lab consent form. Specifically, the following needs to be updated /tasks/consent/niv.html.

approved questionnaires (2022, Dec)

As of December, 2022, the following questionnaires have been approved under the online experiments IRB (11968), but have not yet been added to jspsych-demos:

These questionnaires should be added to this table. Ideally, jsPsych code should be made available for each scale. Placeholder code can be written if need be.

switch license

Move to CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license

add updated contact info to READMEs

reorganize self-report surveys

store each survey in its own javascript file
allow flexible loading
reorganize README

Convert scales to JS

Update special scales

Update README

Update text

mental health resources updates (2022, Dec)

The mental health resources plugin (tasks/self-report/jspsych-mental-health-alert.js) needs to be updated to reflect the latest changes to the online experiments IRB (11968).

add edit distance to spatial-span

https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-022-01908-2

add the nasa-tlx

Standardized self-report measure of task difficulty and participant ability:
https://humansystems.arc.nasa.gov/groups/tlx/downloads/TLXScale.pdf

Would be great to make a plug-in for this.

add parameter for survey scoring

add parameter in survey template plugin such that self-report survey may be scored using non-0 indices.

transfer ravens progressive matrices

As the title suggests, transfer the Ravens progressive matrices code from nivturk-templates to jspsych-demos.

jspsych tutorials

Would be nice to add some jsPsych tutorials as part of the resources tab. All should feel free to suggest below.

updates to survey-template

after reading Pokropek et al. (2023), I was thinking it might be nice to add "areas of interest" to the survey-template plugin. the basic idea is to divide the screen into objects (e.g., survey instructions, item prompts, item responses) and track how/when each of these objects is interacted with. not only might be this helpful for detecting C/IE responding, but also might provide insights into participants' response processes (e.g., linearity of item responding, doubling-back, time taken per item). when paired with other design features (e.g., masking/blurring items unless hovered over), this could allow for a more accurate measure of per-item response times.

(some alternative ideas might simply be to present each item, one at a time, with an ability to navigate between items)

Changelog generators: https://github.com/github-changelog-generator/github-changelog-generator

make instructions skippable

Tasks

Horizons task
Modified risk sensitivity task
Pavlovian go/no-go task
Two-step task

add extensions page

Add page for additional online resources, including:

Server side psych: Tutorials for setting up and serving online experiments (alternatives to Flask).
jeelizPupillometry: This JavaScript library detects, tracks and measures the radius of the 2 pupils of the eyes of the user. It uses a standard 4K webcam and it runs into the web browser, fully client side.
MouseView: Attentional mouse tracking. Alternative to online eye tracking.
jsQUEST: a Bayesian adaptive psychometric method for measuring thresholds in online experiments.

add psychiatric diagnoses checklist

add task-battery demos

Robot factory
MRST

nivlab / jspsych-demos Goto Github PK

jspsych-demos's People

Contributors

Stargazers

Watchers

Forkers

jspsych-demos's Issues