Assignment 1: First task: from a question to saved rows
Weight: 10 course points. Due: Before Meeting 2. Expected work: 2-3 hours.
Task
Adapt the Meeting 1 lexical-decision starter into an eight-item task. Keep four words and four invented nonwords; use your own item set or explain one principled change to the supplied items. Present instructions, a fixation before each item, F/J responses, a 3000 ms deadline, and a data export. Use a JavaScript loop or explicit trials; timeline variables and summary statistics are not required yet.
Before coding, state in two sentences what the participant decides and which variable distinguishes your two item categories. This is a pilot, not a study of a lexicality effect: the tiny item set is not matched or validated.
Required checks
Run once normally and once leaving one response blank. Count eight task rows, not all timeline rows. Check one word and one nonword against the mapping. In this meeting, correctness need not be computed automatically; annotate the expected result in your README. Explain why eight items do not support a strong scientific conclusion.
Submit
Follow the common submission requirements. Include the runnable experiment, a synthetic/self-pilot export, and a short note with your checks. Keep a failed run when it demonstrates an intended branch; label it clearly. Do not collect research participants for this assignment.
Rubric
| Criterion | Evidence | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Instructions and running sequence | Instructions, eight response trials, fixation before each, functional download | 3 |
| Response specification | F/J mapping and 3000 ms deadline match instructions; wrong keys ignored | 2 |
| Data labels | Task/block, unique stimulus IDs, category and expected response saved correctly | 2 |
| Verification | Export includes an intentional timeout and a hand-checked ordinary response | 2 |
| Explanation and attribution | Clear run instructions, changed items explained, help acknowledged | 1 |
| Total | 10 |
Optional extension (no extra points required for full credit)
Add a second instruction page or adapt the task to an explicitly justified language. Explain how familiarity and item matching affect interpretation. Do not add randomization or accuracy code you cannot explain just to make the task look sophisticated.
Submit through the course website. This local copy is for reading and preparation.