Tapestry

Addendum for "rationale": see also the user flow document described here, 3a and 3b are both on Open Humans
https://personalgenomes.mybalsamiq.com/projects/update-pgp/prototype/Updating%20PGP%20Harvard%20connection?key=30090b9af29d405942c7403dec78fb37c4ff5b62

We reviewed this in Harvard PGP staff meeting, albeit with very low attendance.

The argument against this redirect is that establishing this connection is akin to authorizing access to Facebook or Twitter. The OAuth2 process technically concludes with the user on the PGP site.

The argument for this redirect is that the PGP participant will perceive this as "joining a new activity" (akin to other 3rd party activities) and likely expects to continue interacting with the activity. Needing to return the user to the PGP's website to perform authenticated transfer of ID (instead of trusting the participant to faithfully report it) is an artifact of the OAuth2 process.

Initially staff had mixed opinions. After discussion, they seemed to concur that "ending on Open Humans" made sense, especially if users were provided the "stay-or-return" page as is currently implemented.

Certainly I have a strong personal bias here. I would like Open Humans to retain the attention of these users when they join the activity. But I do sincerely believe (especially after watching users go through these processes) that participants expect to explore a new activity/website, and are confused/discouraged from interacting with Open Humans when the process automatically lands them back on the PGP's website.