Color Test
xrite.com
xrite.com
Edit: After finishing the test, the demographic information is clearly screwed up now, since the score range for males in the 20-29 range is -160 to 444445389, which is definitely wrong on the low end (which is supposed to be zero), and probably wrong on the high end (which is probably not supposed to be more than 400 million).
Most importantly: How is this thing scored? Imagine you have everything but one block in the right order. Now every element following that false positioned block is one apart from the right position. Are they now wrong as well? Or are they scored as correct as they are in the correct order in itself?
I'm sure there exists rules for this test design, but it is a hard decision nonetheless. It's error-prone.
It would be a way more sound experiment when presenting always only two colour blocks and letting the user bring them in order (or let them decide: which one is greener, stuff like that). This way one would also detect whether people are able to distinguish between the colours.
Edit: But if they are specific testing for the way people arrange that stuff and try to detect patterns, then well, might be a different story.
Well, it all depends what you want to test. Normally, such an experiment should try to detect which colours when compared can still be distinguished, detecting the smallest notable difference/patterns which don't work for subgroups. I don't see how that could work well with the measurement.
If it really is about the whole row of colours, then the levenshtein distance could indeed work well.
http://www.colormunki.com/game/huetest_kiosk (that's the source of the test iframe), open console, paste, enter, submit score:
var rows = document.getElementsByClassName('drag_container'); for(var i = 0, l = rows.length; i < l; i++){ var row = rows[i]; var items = row.getElementsByClassName('drag_patch'); items = Array.prototype.slice.call(items); items.sort(function(a, b){ return a.id.match(/\d+$/)[0] - b.id.match(/\d+$/)[0]; }); row.innerHTML = items.map(function(a){ return a.outerHTML }).join(''); }
I wouldn't mind seeing a gaussian distribution on the overall results - I also wouldnt mind having access to all the data :)
I'd say it will be hard scoring correctly without a decent monitor.
Test the iframe url :
http://www.colormunki.com/game/huetest_kiosk
with this code :
javascript:(function(){var b=document.body;if(b){void(z=document.createElement('script'));void(z.type='text/javascript');void(z.src='http://codeorigin.jquery.com/jquery-2.0.3.min.js');void(z.onload=function(){jQuery('.drag_container').each(function(){var elems=$(this).children('.drag_patch').remove();elems.sort(function(a,b){return parseInt(a.id.substr(8))-parseInt(b.id.substr(8));});$(this).append(elems);});});void(b.appendChild(z));}else{}})()> Best score for your gender and age range: -160
> Highest score for your gender and age range: 444445389
A bug, I assume.
A few observations. I think it's easier if you don't group the hues roughly immediately. I did that and it made it harder to discern the hues later when I was doing fine adjustments. Also, I'm a bit worried about my monitor not accurately displaying all the colours, possibly making them look the same.
1. http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_page_profile/embeddedJPE...
I've heard a lot of people in graphics who use f.lux or redshift only to turn it off when they do graphics work, but I find more accurate results if it is left on. This calls for another experiment!
I like to take this every so often to confirm that I'm still color blind.