arv with more than 2 answers.

RV Protocol

GO VIEW! @TKR's dojo

Project Home Page

RV webForum (here!)

Email: @Yahoo|@Google

Help make it possible for everyone!

TKR is Funded by:
PJ of Dojo Psi

Simple Session

CS Labs
Ingo Swann
Joe McMoneagle

Baylands Nature Preserve
Pete's Harbor Restaurant
Lucid Dream Example
Radio Listening Post
Test-Bed Trials
Video ABC Put to the Test

P.I.A.

Greg K's ARV Trials

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[Beyonder]

Has anyone done any extensive testing with more than one answer in arv?

Im curious to compare notes with someone.

[PJ]

A little.

My conclusion is that ARV with two choices is difficult enough to choose clearly on; it gets exponentially more difficult with more, to the degree dowsing becomes a good option, despite being forced choice.

Other folks might have other experience tho!

[katzenhai2]

A german team said the results with more than 2 options are better (up to 4). Don't ask me why - they don't told me or I forgot it. 

[Dan N]

One use I can think of is viewing for numbers. You could get an advantage from exponents.

A binary search splits the total number range in two parts and would ask 'is the number in the upper range or lower range?' You could find a number from 1 to 64 in 6 sessions with binary search (64 = 2^6).

Trinary has three ranges and could find a number from 1 to 729 in 6 sessions (729 = 3^6).

[katzenhai2]

I think we should first get ONE number in the range of 0 to 9 correct. If that is even hard to do, why should it be easier with binary or trinary?

[PJ]

I agree. And I think in viewing, doing it with physical-feedback on quantity or an object or something with that number is probably better than some 'abstract'. But, for viewers who want the RV tasking version of Flashcards LOL, Taskerbot AlphaNum lets you set up 'sets of targets' that can be letters, numbers, concepts, or anything that fits within 300 characters. You can also 'style' the feedback for that any way you like (font size/face/color/etc.).

[Lee]

A german team said the results with more than 2 options are better (up to 4). Don't ask me why - they don't told me or I forgot it.

When there are more targets, bleedthrough becomes less of a problem. We have seen viewers do a magnificent job of describing the wrong feedback photo. The more choices there are, the less reason to be drawn to one the viewer won't have presented to him/her as feedback. So imo, it makes the job of the viewer easier. However, multiple choices present the tasker with more to consider when evaluating sessions which is tricky anyway.

lee

[Tunde]

A german team said the results with more than 2 options are better (up to 4). Don't ask me why - they don't told me or I forgot it.

When there are more targets, bleedthrough becomes less of a problem. We have seen viewers do a magnificent job of describing the wrong feedback photo. The more choices there are, the less reason to be drawn to one the viewer won't have presented to him/her as feedback. So imo, it makes the job of the viewer easier. However, multiple choices present the tasker with more to consider when evaluating sessions which is tricky anyway.

lee

Hi Lee,

Well that is true only if the photos are not distinct enough or different from one another.
I aim to use 3 photos for a HomeWin, AwayWin or DRAW format for soccer games when i get the time
to practice using some new cue's someone kindly sent me 

T

Username:
Password: