Creating edges in name generators

Feedback & Feature Requests
,
1

Hi!

I am creating an interview protocol that includes several name generators and I am using ‘quick add’ to capture the names of alters elicited in each. Since there’s likely overlap in some of the alters, I am keeping a side panel where ego can review who they have already named.

Each name generator corresponds to a type of relation that I am interested in. I originally thought that nominating an alter in a specific name generator already created relational data for that specific type of relation, but I have been testing my protocol and it doesn’t seem to be the case. From looking at your sample protocol, it looks like one needs to create an additional variable within each name generator prompt to collect relational data. Am I correct in this understanding? If that is the case, is there any way to incorporate relational data into data already collected? I have done a few interviews already and if there is any way to do this in some systematic way it would be great. Otherwise I will re-enter the information using a new protocol incorporating additional variables to capture the relation.

Thank you so much for your help and congratulations on developing this tool!
All my best,
Eva

2

Hi and welcome to the community, Eva!

Yes, you are correct in your understanding. Nominating alters in a name generator does not automatically capture data about the specific name generator that the alter was nominated in. You can specifically capture this kind of data by using the Assign Additional Variables feature when editing the prompt. We have a documentation article covering this feature that provides more info.

Unfortunately, there is no systemic way to retroactively determine which name generator(s) the existing alters were nominated in. I would recommend what you suggested – editing the protocol to capture additional variables, and using that moving forward.

Hope this helps, and thanks for your kind words about the tool :slight_smile:

3

Thank you so much for your quick reply, Caden! I updated the protocol and will keep working with the new version. Thanks!

1 Like