Embedded condition codes in Survey Flow not outputting correctly | XM Community
Skip to main content
Solved

Embedded condition codes in Survey Flow not outputting correctly


Forum|alt.badge.img+1

My student created a survey with three randomized conditions, embedding a condition code of 1, 2, or 3 in the Survey Flow (see attached).  However, the data that outputted contained only 1s in the condition column.  Any idea why this might have happened?  I tried copying the survey to a new file, ran it, and the condition codes outputted correctly.  Maybe the student forgot to “publish” after creating the codes?  But if so, wouldn’t that problem also crop up in the copy of the survey I created?

 

Thanks for any suggestions. 

Best answer by TomG

They may have forgotten to publish.  They can look under Tools → Versions → View version history to see when the survey was published and compare that date/time against the start date/times in the response data.

Since you copied the latest correct version, your results are correct. It doesn’t tell you anything other than the latest version is correct.

View original

5 replies

TomG
Level 8 ●●●●●●●●
Forum|alt.badge.img+27
  • Level 8 ●●●●●●●●
  • 5938 replies
  • Answer
  • December 18, 2023

They may have forgotten to publish.  They can look under Tools → Versions → View version history to see when the survey was published and compare that date/time against the start date/times in the response data.

Since you copied the latest correct version, your results are correct. It doesn’t tell you anything other than the latest version is correct.


Forum|alt.badge.img+1
  • Author
  • 3 replies
  • December 18, 2023

Thanks -- that may be possible, but just to be clear, I didn’t copy “the latest correct version” -- I copied the version that had generated the issues (as far as I know), as no corrections were (consciously) made to the original survey after this problem was noticed.  But, again, I wouldn’t rule out the “publishing” issue, especially if no other alternative is plausible.

Thanks again. 


TomG
Level 8 ●●●●●●●●
Forum|alt.badge.img+27
  • Level 8 ●●●●●●●●
  • 5938 replies
  • December 19, 2023
award1 wrote:

Thanks -- that may be possible, but just to be clear, I didn’t copy “the latest correct version” -- I copied the version that had generated the issues (as far as I know), as no corrections were (consciously) made to the original survey after this problem was noticed.  But, again, I wouldn’t rule out the “publishing” issue, especially if no other alternative is plausible.

Thanks again. 

What you copied was the current version. It may or may not have been published (the likelihood is that it wasn’t published).


Forum|alt.badge.img+1
  • Author
  • 3 replies
  • December 19, 2023

That’s my point: I copied the “current” version (which, as far as I know, is still having outputting problems, possibly due to not being published -- unfortunately, the history is less than revealing, since it mentions  “Survey flow changes saved” over a month ago as “changes since the previous version” and the Survey Flow appears to include the correction condition codes), but when I copied it, the new version (which I did not publish) did NOT have the same problem -- it outputted the condition codes correctly (whereas the one I copied from had not).  Perhaps copying a survey automatically incorporates changes made to the original, even if those changes weren’t originally published?

 

 

 


Forum|alt.badge.img+1
  • Author
  • 3 replies
  • December 19, 2023

In other words, maybe there’s a previous, “published” version of my original survey that has the wrong embedded conditions codes (I don’t see any evidence of that, as the Survey Flows looks correct in the previous version history, but maybe).  At some point the incorrect survey got correctly revised, without being published (and thus failed to output the correct condition codes), and that’s what I copied over in to a new survey today, again without publishing the new survey -- except that that new survey works fine (it has the correct condition codes).  That all sounds possible -- it’s just a bit surprising.

Thanks again.


Leave a Reply