[magnusbaringer]

Thank you very much for your time and feedback! The scars are indeed not too prominent. In fact we had ours of discussions about the intensity of the scars - in the end we decided to go for a scar intensity that equals the average scar after about 2 years (so they wouldn't be too obvious in reality either).

The survey has 88 picture pairs that are mixed randomly. These 88 pairs are the absolute minimum to cover all relevant breast conditions in a way that allows us to get good statistical data. We calculated the average decision time per picture pair with 3 seconds - hence the 5 minutes. However the survey is structured in a way that if a participant only clicks 10 pictures, we can still use the data from those 10 clicks. So every click counts - and if someone is kind enough to click all 88 pictures, we get a full set of data.

Thank you very much for your interest and support!

[ajnin]

I'm pretty sure I've been having the same few (dozen or so) pictures in a loop. Maybe the differences are too subtle to notice to the non-professional eye. Also I feel the resolution is a bit too low to really tell, the scars are barely visible in the images, not sure if that would also be the case in real life.

[magnusbaringer]

Thank you very much for your support! In fact now picture pair is equal - although some may look very similar. Some pictures may loop - but that is because we need to compare some conditions to the same "base" condition (e.g. size asymmetry from a C-Cup breast compared to an A-Cup and a B-Cup breast...so those two pairs are different, but the "base" of a C-Cup appears twice. The study is designed that way so that we are able to cover every important breast condition in one survey. I hope that explanation helps - thank you very much again for your support!