If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate.

What would you expect to happen if you submitted a correction?
Where should the invitation explain whether another submission replaces the first?
What would you need to know before allowing a submission to be linked to an earlier one?
What would you do if you were unsure whether your correction was received?

Author notes / illustrative keys where applicable:
1. Test the intended replacement rule without treating every repeat as abuse.
2. Locate the disclosure needed before participation, not after a report dispute.
3. Check understanding of linkage without collecting an identifying value in this pilot.
4. Find uncertainty about the process rather than asking for real response content.