 Okay. Well, thank you once again for joining us today on this webinar on the Global Flourishing Study, Understanding and Accessing Wave 1 Data. My name is Leslie Markham. I'm the Program Manager for the study at the Centre for Open Science, and I'm joined by Alex Vogelman, the Project Manager at Baylor's Institute for Studies of Religion, and he'll kick off the webinar with a short introduction for us. I'll follow with a few slides on accessing the data through pre-registration or registered reports, and then I'll hand it over to Zak Ritter, Project Director at Gallup, who will discuss the data collection. Following, Zak will have Theresa Stankoff, who is the Data Manager at the Centre for Open Science, and she'll describe how to access the data. Please add any questions you may have to the Q&A. We'll try to answer some directly in the response box as we go, and we'll have plenty of time at the end of the presentation to answer more questions. We'll also follow up with any questions we don't manage to get to on this webinar. This webinar is being recorded and it will be sent out to all people who register for this webinar. It's my pleasure to introduce Alex Vogelman to provide an overview of the Global Flourishing Study. Thanks, Alex. Thank you, Leslie, and let me just say how delighted we are to be at this point, to be partnering with the Centre for Open Science and Gallup on this exciting project. So just again, I serve as the Project Manager for the Global Flourishing Study. I'm housed here at Baylor of the Institute for Studies of Religion, and you're probably all somewhat familiar with the general overview of the study itself that we're collecting data in over 20 countries, 200,000 people, all the big numbers. I wanted to just take a quick minute to give an update on how the research team that's housed mostly between Baylor and Harvard are employing this first wave of data. So there's a team of about 40 researchers across our institutions and then a few other adjacent ones that have formed a set of working groups. There's altogether about 60 working groups that are made up of about three to four people each. And what that group is doing, that group of 60 teams is taking each one of the constructs, roughly 60 constructs, and they are doing two papers on this first wave of data, one on demographics and one on childhood predictors. And then they're comparing that one construct across each of the 22 countries. And so since this is just first wave of data, not longitudinal yet, that we're taking this more measured approach and just trying to get a snapshot, just trying to get an even-handed look across all the countries and to seeing what's there. So I just wanted to mention that just to give folks a sense of what the Baylor-Harvard research teams are up to with this wave of data, but of course we are hoping that many others will use this data in ways that are fitting for their own research agendas. And so we're just excited and thrilled by the possibilities that this new data set is opening up. And again, thanks to Leslie and all the team at COS, thanks to Zach and team at Gallup for the amazing work that they've done on the research side where we set. We're just thrilled to see all this come together. So I'll stop it there and hand it back over to you Leslie, thank you. Thanks very much, Alex. And it's been a pleasure to work with the core research team on this as well. Okay, I'm going to share my screen now and we'll get cracking on some of these slides. And also just recognizing that Zach Ritter from Gallup has just joined us as well. So, hey Zach. Okay. So just a few words on how to access the data. During this webinar, we really want to focus on the data itself. And we have already done two previous webinars about the study, how to do pre-registration, how to do a registered report. We also have a website, COS.io forward slash GFS. Please do visit that. You'll see that there are six tabs full of information about the study, how to access the data, lots of resources, FAQs and also how to sign up for our newsletter and how to contact us if you have any questions. So we don't want to have to cover ground that we've already done in previous webinars. So please do visit that website for a lot of information. So there are three ways to access the data. Firstly, you'll need to prepare a pre-registration on the Global Flourishing Registry, which is housed on the Open Science Framework OSF for short and administered by the Centre for Open Science. You'll also have the option to prepare a registered report along with a pre-registration and submit it to a journal prior to accessing the data if you wish to try that route. If you don't wish to prepare a pre-registration or a registered report, you can wait for one year to obtain the data through Open Access. One purpose of the Global Flourishing Study is to provide longitudinal data to enable more rigorous research designs for many research questions that can be investigated with cross-sectional data. And so for this first wave, the benefits of longitudinal data are not yet present in the data itself. So to meet this purpose, researchers should construct either a synthetic longitudinal study by linking the GFS data with other data sets or by using the retrospective childhood assessments that are actually contained within this Wave 1 data. And you should have at least one of your research questions or hypotheses testing with this synthetic longitudinal design. So a quick run through pre-registration. When you go to the registry to add in your pre-registration, you want to be thinking about what that actually looks like. It's not just an application form. It's a way that you can specify your research plan in advance of your study and separate your planned, i.e. confirmatory hypothesis generating research from unplanned exploratory and hypothesis generating work. And the other thing is that the pre-registration process means that you'll have a time-stamped copy of your pre-registration to demonstrate what your research design was before you see the data. Doesn't mean to say that you can't do exploratory work after that, but it just makes sure that it's clear about what you knew before you saw the data or what you researched after you'd seen the data. So as you're designing your pre-registration, think of it as a way to draft your methods and results as if you were writing a journal article. This helps you think through what's to be done and exactly how you'll report it. So be as precise and explicit with your plan as you can and list out your hypotheses and which variables you'll use. Make design and analysis decisions before you view the data and describe the statistical tests you'll use on the data, what decision criteria you're using for interpreting the results and demonstrate your methodology and how the hypotheses will be tested and also list model form, covariates and characteristics that you'll be using and obviously detail what outcomes will be reported. So basically try and anticipate some of the deviations that you might need and include those in your plan as well. So just be as thorough as you possibly can. So once your pre-registration is received by us, we will review it in our moderation channel. We're not reviewing your research questions. What we're doing is reviewing to make sure that it's a rigorous analysis plan basically. Once your pre-registration has been moderated and accepted and the data is available, we will email you a view-only link to the data. Please share this with your colleagues that you've listed on the pre-registration but please do not share the link with other researchers. If you know of other researchers who would like to access the data, please get them to do a pre-registration and we will be happy to provide them with that data. So as I said previously, there's lots of help available. Please do reach out to us. We're here to really help you succeed and get this data. So look at the resources on the GFS web pages. There's some examples on the bottom of this slide. There's a guide to pre-registration. There's a pre-registration template. If you want to plan out your study on a Google Doc first and before you put it into the registry, there'll be a code book available. There's lots of FAQs. And we also have six asynchronous self-training modules available. Also a couple of webinars. So please do look at those as well. If you have any other questions, feel free to email us at globalflourishingatcos.io. We're here definitely, certainly to help you. Okay, I'm going to pass over to Zach now from Gallup to discuss the survey and data collection. Great, thank you, Leslie. And pleasure to have so many people on the call and super exciting to get this data set out in the world and have analysis shortly. So we're really excited about that. Could we go back to the last slide, Leslie? Here we go. So I'm just going to present what we did in the last three years to collect this data. And actually the formation of this project preceded even the last three years. It was about five or six years ago that the core team started to float this idea to run this longitudinal study. So the questionnaire development was a big lift that occurred over a two year period. And it involved an inclusive process and we really took the challenges of 3MC, cross-cultural, regional, national, survey research seriously when we were developing this questionnaire. So the first stage of the questionnaire development was the core item selection. So these were identifying existing sets of validated items on well-being, religion and spirituality and demographic information. These are more the key unique aspects of the global flourishing study, kind of the dependent variables in some respects, but not necessarily. From that core selection process, researchers were contacted, a set of experts including those from literature disciplines and solicited item recommendations for determinants of human flourishing across social, political, psychological and economic dimensions. Upon that feedback from those domain experts, there was a global input on the core items as well. That occurred after the instrument, an initial draft was created. So there was a solicitation of a certain set of scholars around the world including high income countries but also lower income countries, China, Brazil, South Africa for instance, researchers in those countries on the initials complete survey draft. And upon feedback from those experts, there was a discussion, the instrument was refined, some items were dropped, some items are added and then there was a cross-cultural and translation input stage. And this is where the 3MC aspect, again cross-cultural, cross-regional, cross-national survey research was discussed in earnest at first. And so there were experts in translation and cross-cultural validity. And during those conversations, the topics covered included suitability of the survey items in a global context, making sure they are applicable to all countries and cultures, regions, overcoming common translation challenges and how we would approach that topic and evaluating input from the scholars around the world. Once that stage concluded, there was an open survey feedback stage, a new draft of the survey was put out for open solicitation via online channels on the updated draft questionnaire. So this is again trying to make the process as inclusive as possible. After a period of time, I think a few months, over 150 experts and scholars responded to the request and that resulted in adjustments of 26 items. Once that stage concluded, there was the questionnaire optimization stage. This is where Gallup got involved quite a lot and Gallup survey design specialists suggested items to trim and refine item wording, response scales, and there was discussions around those sorts of topics. The goal for Gallup was to create a concise instrument where every item served a purpose. And the reason for that was excessively long surveys, effect recruitment retention, and the type of respondent likely to complete the survey. Again, we wanted to have this be reflective of entire country's population. And long surveys, especially conducted over the telephone, would prevent that goal. And so that is why it's not hundreds and hundreds of questions. There had to be a very strong core instrument that we were fielding. Upon that conclusion of that stage, we then translated the surveys to do questionnaire testing and refinement. That translation stage includes kind of a modified trap. Again, this is best practices for 3MC research approach. That includes translating the instrument. One translator translates the instrument. A different translator reviews the translation. Any differences are then adjudicated by another translator. And then that survey is piloted. Any issues that arise during piloting are then addressed. And then the translation, final translations are documented for researchers' purposes. We'll get to deliverables in a couple of slides, but one of those deliverables will be the translations of the survey items in all the different languages. There are 34 languages across 22 countries that we fielded. Next slide, Leslie, please. Sorry, Jack, I'm having a bit of trouble with my... No worries. I'm glad. I have more, I'm sure. Okay. So questionnaire testing and refinement. So this was the stage after the questionnaire development. Very critical. It took this very seriously over a six-month period where we rolled out cognitive interviews, 230 in 22 countries. So approximately 10 in each country, and then 20 in India, given the diversity of that country in the size of the population. The goal of cognitive interviews is to ensure individual survey items and final questionnaires... The final questionnaire elicit the desired information while minimizing respondent burden. So what we assessed was responding comprehension of the items, item relevance, and ability of the respondents to answer the survey questions. So issues like response scale didn't make sense. Once we did the cognitive interviews, we took the feedback, made some adjustments, and then we rolled out a pretest. The goal of a pretest, and this was done in over a thousand surveys were completed in 22 countries. And this is a multi-mode endeavor, which we can get into later, where there's going to be some respondents who take the survey via the web, some who take the survey via telephone. This is the main instrument, the annual survey. And that depends on that person's access to technology. So we don't want to only include people who can take the survey via web, especially in lower-income countries, for instance, Tanzania or India, where that would exclude a large portion of the population. So we conducted these pretests, and the goal of the pretest was to identify areas where logistical and practical challenges might arise, and also to provide information the average length of interviews. So again, we're aiming for a telephone interview around 20 to 25 minutes. Going beyond that, you risk a lot of break-off, and more respondents will hesitate to participate in the survey. So we knew we were around that, but it was a little bit over from the pretests. So the refinement and finalization stage then took all the feedback from the cognitive interviews and the pretest, updated the questionnaire when needed, and also identified a certain number of items that we had to cut. So again, there were these painful cuts at each stage, but that was ultimately to be able to improve our ability and retention and recruitment down the road. And then the final note here, before we get to the fieldwork slide, is that there's a large pre-fieldwork effort. We had to adapt the questionnaire to various modes of administration based on the sampling approach and the responsibility to use the internet to complete the online survey. So for most countries, there was a probability sampling approach that was adopted, and we completed an intake survey, a recruitment survey via face-to-face or telephone. And then when the respondent completed that survey, we then followed up with a annual survey. That's the baseline survey. That's the survey that will be repeated over time for the next five years. And that survey was fielded either via web, so they got an invitation via email, SMS, or WhatsApp depending on what information they provided and or we called them back via telephone and completed it if they didn't have online access. And so part of that pre-fieldwork was to adapt the survey so it made sense for the mode, try to reduce the differences between the modes as much as possible. And then there was the survey programming part of this. We had to program this over a disparate set of survey operation platforms because of the multi-mode approach. During that stage, each of the surveys for each mode, for each language, for each country was presentation checked. So we would go through the survey, review it, make sure everything appeared as it should. And then we did dummy data checking to make sure that the skip logic and everything operated as intended. And then finally, there was a small incentive that was included to encourage participation in the annual survey. And we had to do a lot of testing around that incentive administration. The incentive was administered either via gift card or mobile top-up, again, depending on person's access to an email address. And then finally, we were testing automation of the invitations for the annual web survey. And again, we sent that via email, SMS, or WhatsApp. If someone provided all three avenues, we sent it to all three avenues to increase our chances of participation in the survey. OK. Next slide, listen. So on the field work side, this table, this gives an overview. I forgot to mention on the questionnaire development, we do have a deliverable, the questionnaire development report that has been out for the last two years that will be reissued with some minor updates when the data is released on February 13th. And this table, there will be a methodology document and this is a small portion of what will be covered on the methodology document as a chart providing information about what we did in each country. But as you'll see, a lot of the countries had probability-based sampling. A few countries were supplemented from the probability-based sampling with existing online panels. And we will recontact those same panelists year after year. So that's why you see a non-probability portion for some countries. And then for two countries, it was a non-probability sample. High-quality online panels and we could talk about that more that is expounded upon in the methodology document as well. But those were the sampling designs and then these are the modes that we fielded in each of the countries. You'll see some variations. In Germany, we only fielded via phone and then web for the annual because it was a high-income country with very high internet penetration so we had less concerns about systematic exclusion of respondents in Germany compared to other countries that were high middle income or lower where that was an acute concern. And then this is the total number of completes that we have in each country. So the biggest upshot here is that we have over 200,000 participants from 21 countries in one territory and that data will be available soon. There's a caveat that we will be fielding in China soon, shortly, this month or in February for wave one. There were some delays. The approval process was drawn out for a very long time but we had the fortunate good luck news to get approval in January and so we are pushing hard to collect that data. However, that data will not be made available until wave two data for all countries is issued early Q1 next year. And when that data is issued and put out, there will be wave one and wave two data for China. So we'll collect data at this stage and then we'll collect data in about 10 months time. So not quite a year, but close to a year and then that way all countries will be made available for data release and wave two. Next slide, Liz. And this is the final note about data collection steps. This is a summary of how the process will work. As you will see, there were some of those countries that nonprobability sampling approach and then there are some countries that probability sampling approach. There's one exception here, Gallup panel is a probability based online panel. So it's a probability approach but it went down this path because we didn't do an intake, we just combined the intake and annual survey for existing online panels. So the probability based one would use fresh sample, recruit, do the intake survey, then the annual survey and then nonprobability would go through do a combined intake and annual survey. Everyone who completed it is that pool of over 200,000 respondents from wave one. Then we have a mid-year survey, a retention activity to remind participants that they are part of the study to update in contact information if any has changed to increase our ability to contact them in the future and as well to field a few additional questions that could have an analytical purpose down the road. So the mid-year survey is ongoing. We fielded in some countries already that were a bit earlier in the fielding process for the recruitment of wave one and panel respondents and we will be fielding the rest of the countries very shortly for the mid-year survey. Annual survey will then occur and the annual survey is just started in the U.S. because we had recruited that over a year ago and for other countries it will be occurring between mostly April to June this year. So we'll collect the data, we'll process it, data, clean it, and then have it ready for early Q1 next year, wave two data set on the COS website. And then we just basically repeat this process back and forth through years two through five and that's the basic approach of how we designed it and these are the year one deliverables. It would be aggregated data set with country whites, code book of the variables in the data set, a translation document that provides translations across all 34 languages in the 22 countries for all items fielded. It's an Excel document and a questionnaire development report which again outlines all the steps that we took to be inclusive and take 3MC research as seriously as possible. And then, yeah, I guess I covered the future data collection efforts already and I think that's all from me. Thanks very much, Zach. That was really very helpful. So I'm going to pass it over to Theresa now just to talk about accessing the data. Yes, thank you. I am going to give a summary of who will receive access to the data and when, what the release of the data will include and where those materials can be found just to summarize a bunch of the material or the information that's come up so far and perhaps provide a little bit of clarification on some other points. So the wave one data will be available to contributors to projects pre-registered on the Global Flourishing Study Registry in the coming weeks. So February 2024. This data will become available to anyone regardless of whether or not a pre-registration was completed one year from the initial release date. So I did see a question come up in the Q&A. We are hoping to provide an incentive for people to do pre-registrations for their studies. So those researchers who do that will get early access to the data but the data will become available to anyone in the future and that will be the trend for the other waves of data as well where pre-registered studies will get the earlier access and then one year from release it will become available to the public. Next slide please Leslie. So wave one of the data will include data from the intake survey and the first annual survey. It's planning to be available in at least CSV, DTA and SAV formats to provide a variety of formats for users and these can be downloaded as a single data set or by country. There's also going to be associated documentation for the data sets available to anyone regardless of whether or not there's a pre-registration for the study and this will include a code book for variable and value labels. The methodology report that Zach was discussing which includes details about how the data is collected as well as the questionnaire development report which contains that documentation about the survey questions. Not on the slide here but also included will be that translation document again that Zach mentioned which covers the various translations of the questions to the different languages that the survey was given in. Next slide please. The data is going to be available on a private component of the GFS project on the OSF. You can access the public facing portion of this project using that QR code there. But this is available on the OSF and a view only link will be sent out by email to those who have pre-registered a project so that they can access that those private components that contain the data sets that they have pre-registered for. Again, one year out so February 2025 that component will become publicly available. Other supplemental materials that I mentioned that are available publicly will also be able to be accessed through this project or through the Global Flourishing Study website. And that wraps up my portion. Thank you, Leslie. Thanks very much, Teresa. That's great. So I'm just going to... I've just got a couple of slides here. If you're interested in participating in some research that we're doing under a National Science Foundation grant, it's a randomized control trial. And so we're trying to expand the knowledge base on the efforts of registered reports and pre-registration through this Global Flourishing Study. The study will measure effects such as the impact of registered reports on timelines from conception to publication, publication outcomes, in other words, which studies are ultimately published or rejected, and researchers' beliefs and experiences with registered reports and pre-registration. So the study has four arms. Participants can agree to be randomly assigned to a GFS data access pathway, i.e. pre-registration or registered reports and be surveyed on their experience. Or you can opt in to be surveyed on your experience with either mechanism after you've completed the GFS registered report or pre-registration submission. Anyone can enroll to be randomly assigned a pathway prior to uploading a submission to the registry. And the main outcomes will be comparing the two randomized participant arms while the self-selected participants will help us better understand the selection process. So pre-registration and registered reports could be potentially transformative on how research is conducted. And so great examples of folk that we're hoping will enroll in this study are those who want early access to the Global Flourishing Data Set but are undecided on whether to do a pre-registration or a registered report. Or if you want to try out a registered report but you aren't quite sure where to start. Or if you're willing to be part of the growing evidence collection on pre-commitment devices like registered reports and pre-registration. You can see there's an enrollment URL down there. I will send out these slides with the recording in the next week or so. But you can also find details of this trial on the Global Flourishing website as well. Okay. So I'm going to stop sharing and we can dive into some Q&A with our panelists here. So let's have a look. So from Taylor, we have, do pre-registrations need to have a longitudinal component when using Wave 1 data, i.e. synthetic longitudinal design? Or are we allowed to do truly cross-sectional analysis on the Wave 1 data? So the answer to that is you have an option. You can either use a synthetic longitudinal design with another data set or you can use the childhood predictors which are variables within the Wave 1 data, but you do need to choose one or other. So I hope that answers that question. From Yasmin, lots of it, hang on a minute, I'm just trying to summarize this one quickly. Just worried about duplicating works. It's not all researchers are publishing what they hope to inquire. It's a secret coordination process, i.e. might there be neutral person who can also check private registrations to flag significant overlap of specific studies. I think that the answer to that is on the OSF, there is, researchers are able to make their research public immediately or they can put an embargo on it. That is a standard process on the OSF and we obviously have to respect researchers' preferences on when they want to release their pre-registrations. So I don't think that we could probably have a secret coordination since we're moderating the process, but we're not the subject matter experts, we're not looking at exactly what these studies are doing. So unfortunately, I think what we're really hoping to do with this project, since it is a long, longitudinal study, is to grow a community of practice where we can get researchers working together for the great good of the subject matter, but I don't think that we can start looking at private registration to flag overlaps, unfortunately. So I'm sorry about that. David, did I get it right that one necessary need to submit some form of pre-registration to get the data? If so, I don't understand what's the reason for this policy? Why don't you simply? So David, the idea of requiring pre-registration is to make sure that we provide those open science practices where we're trying to stop folks from just p-hacking the data until they find things that are significant. The idea of doing pre-registration is that you think through your research plan before you see the data and you commit to doing certain tests on the data. That doesn't preclude you from doing additional exploratory research, but it really helps to divide what you did or what you were going to do, what your hypotheses were before you saw the data, and then what your hypotheses were and exploratory analysis after you've seen the data. So that's the idea is to try and make this a rigorous research process and really help improve reproducibility of the work. Irene, if I don't manage to get a pre-registration in the registry by February, but only in March, do I get immediate access or do I have to? Yes, that's a really good point, Irene. No, as soon as you get your pre-registration in, we will send you the data files if it's after the data has been released. You can put in your pre-registration at any time, and once that pre-registration is moderated you'll receive the files. Yasmin, pre-registration is still possible out of February and access would then be activated once the registry. Yes, that's absolutely correct. Yes. And Luther, will individuals with pre-registrations have access to all the GFS data or will items be made available that were specifically detailed in the pre-registration? So when you do your pre-registration you will be asked if you want the whole global data for every country. If you're working specifically on, you know, choosing specific countries you can choose it by country, but if you want access to all of the data just click the global dataset and we will send it all to you. And Max, can you clarify again about the main disadvantage of submitting the proposal shortly after WAV1 data becoming available? I don't think there is a disadvantage in submitting the proposal shortly after WAV1 data becomes available. You know, once you've decided on your research questions, methodologies, analysis plan then submit your pre-registration and as soon as the WAV1 data is available we will send it to you. So Shade, did I understand correctly that there would not be any list of topics other researchers are looking at or have under review in a journal, so over that might happen. That's correct. If you go to our website and click on the registry you'll be able to see those pre-registrations that researchers have made public already. There are already a few in there and we're hoping that as this process unwinds there will be more and more other public pre-registrations that you can have a look at to see what other people are doing. But also understanding that there are some researchers who've opted to embargo their pre-registration so you won't be able to see what they're doing. Okay. Mukesh, usually how much time does it take to review a pre-registration request? That's a great question. So the workflow is that you submit your pre-registration if you're submitting it with other colleagues, other collaborators they will have a 72-hour window to review that pre-registration and ask you to make edits etc. Once that 72-hour period has gone by it will be received in moderation with the registry and depending on the volume we will get to that within a couple of business days and send you out the data. Do we have any questions for Teresa and Zach about the data itself? Any other questions? And if something occurs to you then please do follow up with me and I'll either try and help or I can field the question to Teresa and Zach or Alex. It does look like we have one more question. Is the Google spreadsheet the main way to learn about the data and variables? No, that is an older for the sample data. There is currently, or there is going to be a code book that will be released around the same time that the data becomes available to those who have pre-registered. I don't have an exact date on that yet, but that will be available to learn about what data is in the data sets what the value labels are etc. So that will be a more stable and reliable way than the existing Google spreadsheet. Thanks, Teresa. I said I answered but I didn't answer it. Is it in all 28 states in India? I am guessing it probably is. I don't know off the top of my head. We did about 28,000 we recruited 28,000 respondents from across India just stratifying by region, by state and then down below it was all face-to-face recruitment in India. Unless if we had an exclusion which would be put in the methodology document we should have covered all 28 states. There is a question from Charlotte here. Is the full question protocol available for us to view at this time? My response to that would be that we do have the questionnaire development report on the website. Zach, do you want to add anything else to that question? No, I think that the QDR covers a lot of those issues. And also the code book has all the questions listed as well. Is that right, Teresa? At the moment we have a code book on our website which will be updated. It's the code book that we released for the sample data set. Teresa, would you like to attempt Emma's question about the code book and the region variables or Zach, maybe that's one for you as well. Sure. I'm not sure what's not clear about them. How are they broken down? Okay, those are usually administrative units. So it just depends. We can't get down to very, very tiny administrative units sometimes like NUS-3 because it did adaptive disclosure concerns. But they are mainly like in Europe at least NUS-1, NUS-2, like states in the U.S. So the U.S. you probably see about 50 states and maybe some territories. So that's how it's created and in the data set you'll see just one region variable or there might be two or three. There's actually three region variables, region one, region two, region three. Region one's the lowest level administrative unit and then going up to higher levels from there, we put it collapsed into one region variable because that's cleaner, not 22 different countries with 22 different regions. So it's a very long list and then you guys can break it out from there if you desire by country. That's great. Thank you. So Marietta asks, so what do we use for pre-registration? I've just put in the chat the link to the GFS website. If you go there you're going to find a lot of information about the template and how to pre-register the two previous webinars lots and lots of information on there which I think will help you Marietta and if you still have some questions then please do feel free to email me. I will also put the email address in the chat. Yes and if this is a follow up about the Google spreadsheet and the data and variables that should be adequate to complete a pre-registration just note that it's not the official code book for the final data set but it should have a lot of the information that'll help you complete a pre-registration just be on the lookout for the official one which is forthcoming. Sorry I was busy typing so Teresa you just answered the question from Michelle about the child address. No that was a follow up about the... Okay right is there a clear flag about which variables that is they are? My guess would be any question it has when you're 12 years old I think that covers it but just look for retrospective wording I don't think there's a flag right now in any of the documentation that is out there but that would be my best guess for flagging those on your side. Okay great all right we've got five minutes left but if there are no more questions we'll give you five minutes back oh there we are there's another one there. Is there a file of survey items in a logical order rather than a code book that has the item in alphabetical order? We're debating the code book right now about how to present it and one of those is whether we put it into alphabetical orders. We don't know yet how to answer your question but yeah maybe that's a reason to put it in alphabetical order so I'll add that to the ledger of alphabetical order argument. One more thing there the data will be made available in DTA and SPSS so data in SPSS all variables will have the variable label all response options will have response labels you can create a quick code book very easily in those programs. Understood that those are proprietary software not the same as CSV but that is the other option that would be possible you can just alphabetically order it in the data set and then output this code book in Stata and then you would output the code book in Stata. All right well thank you very much for joining us as I've already said we're here to help so any questions please do reach out contact us look at the website and I want to say big thank you to Alex and Zach and Teresa for all the knowledge that you're bringing to this study it's really impressive and I think it's a really important data set and also a big thanks to Amanda who's on our communications team who is such a wizard keeping us all going on zoom so appreciate her help as well so thank you very much to you all and good luck with your research