search

MAPLE-Lab / auditory-research-suite

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/auditory-research-suite
0 stars 2 forks source link

Slider Size and Customization #10

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Slider size.  
a) The slider is pretty small in this version.  It would be better if the 
slider took up the full range of the right panel (within reason).  It would 
also be useful if we were able to control the relative sizing of the panels.  
Right now the layout of the response screen is divided (horizontally) into two 
equally spaced sections (one for instructions, one for the response slider).  
For some experiments this might make sense (i.e. the rhythm one has a yes/no 
response) but for others with a continuous response slider it would be better 
to have more room.  

b) It would be good to have a parameter to turn on/off the tick markings on the 
slider.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by guse...@datamininglab.com on 2 Oct 2013 at 3:47

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
This may affect TOJ as well.

May end up being done as part of UI customization for Issue 5

Original comment by guse...@datamininglab.com on 2 Oct 2013 at 3:50

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by guse...@datamininglab.com on 2 Oct 2013 at 3:51

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by guse...@datamininglab.com on 2 Oct 2013 at 4:27

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by guse...@datamininglab.com on 2 Oct 2013 at 4:30

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I'm bumping this up since it's become clear that the slider size seems to 
affect some of our experimental outcomes (this is a surprise to me!)  We found 
this by accident when we got some "strange" looking results using the Java 
build (big slider), so we ran the same stimuli in the old Python build (smaller 
slider) and got the expected finding.  Obviously there are a few things that 
are different, but this is the main one and so being able to play with the 
slider size and make it as similar as possible to the Python one is now quite 
important.

Original comment by schutz.m...@gmail.com on 3 Nov 2013 at 9:46

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Could you explain more in detail how the slider size is affecting outcomes? Is 
this because of differing levels of granularity on the response slider, or 
something else? 

The main issue seems to suggest that the response sliders need to be bigger, 
but the update is unclear on the how size is affecting the experimental 
outcome.

Original comment by zach.br...@datamininglab.com on 6 Nov 2013 at 11:07

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Please see the attached file for details regarding the slider(s).

Original comment by jess.gil...@gmail.com on 8 Nov 2013 at 7:43

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
As per the "Java vs. Python Slider Size" pdf, properties have been added to 
allow for some relative positioning of the Status and Response blocks. (This 
property can actually be set in the properties file of any experiment, Rhythm 
as well as SI.)

Property is called statusOrientation, and can be set the placement of the 
Status block to "verticalTop", "verticalBottom", "horizontalLeft", 
"horizontalRight", or "suppressed". Defaults to "horizontalLeft".

A property called showTickMarks was also added.

The sliders will dynamically fill as much space as possible, so they will 
resize if the window is resized. 
This means that the sliders fill more space than they used to, including in the 
horizontal layouts.

Original comment by zach.br...@datamininglab.com on 11 Dec 2013 at 7:47