Changes for page Measuring Instruments

Summary

• Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
1		-For the evaluation of a prototype, there are several frameworks that can be followed, starting with DECIDE[1]. Decide stands for:
	1	+For the evaluation of a prototype, there are several frameworks that can be followed, starting with DECIDE(Kurniawan, 2004). Decide stands for:
2	2
3	3	* **D**etermine the goals
4	4	* **E**xplore the questions
...	...	@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
9	9
10	10	First, we would have to determine the high-level goals for the study and the motivation behind them, since they can influence how we approach it. Then, we choose the evaluation approach, the methods that will be used, whether these are based on quantitative or qualitative data, and the process of data collecting, analysis, and presentation. At the same time, any practical issues, such as participants, budget, or schedule, are identified and a pilot study is performed if needed. It is important to adhere to any ethical procedures that are in place, to ensure the participant knows their rights and is protected. Finally, the evaluation of the data takes place, where it is determined whether the results are in any way unreliable, invalid, biased, related to the environment and whether they generalize well.
11	11
12		-Another framework often used is IMPACT[2]:
	12	+Another framework often used is IMPACT (Benyon et al., 2005):
13	13
14	14	* **I**ntention
15	15	* **M**easures and metrics
...	...	@@ -27,10 +27,9 @@
27	27	When executing an experiment, it is also interesting to examine the interaction from multiple lenses, in order to identify issues and opportunities that are not immediately obvious. That can mean from the perspective of a different stakeholder that is not the main user, other groups that might not directly interact with the system or even a more technical or legal perspective.
28	28
29	29
30		-For our study, the process we followed mostly resembles the IMPACT framework since we focused on each of these elements separately and tried to combine them to build our evaluation study. We first defined our research questions and then decided how we could best evaluate them. We decided on a within-subject design and a combination of quantitative and qualitative data. The element of the participants for our study was quite predetermined since we didn't have the access to people with actual dementia, therefore we would use students, peers, and friends to test our hypotheses. By examining our use cases, we thought that the most interesting one we wanted to test was the meal discourse, and consequently, we defined the rest of the aspects regarding the prototype, the experimentation process, and the environment. Our experiment in detail can be found in
31		-( [[//Evaluation// -> //Test// >> https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/view/Test/]])
	30	+For our study, the process we followed mostly resembles the IMPACT framework since we focused on each of these elements separately and tried to combine them to build our evaluation study. We first defined our research questions and then decided how we could best evaluate them. We decided on a within-subject design and a combination of quantitative and qualitative data. The element of the participants for our study was quite predetermined since we didn't have the access to people with actual dementia, therefore we would use students, peers, and friends to test our hypotheses. By examining our use cases, we thought that the most interesting one we wanted to test was the meal discourse, and consequently, we defined the rest of the aspects regarding the prototype, the experimentation process, and the environment. Our experiment in detail can be found in the [[//Evaluation// -> //Test// >> https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/view/Test/]] section.
32	32
33	33
34		-[1] Kurniawan, S. (2004). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction by Preece, Sharp and Rogers (2001), ISBN 0471492787.
35		-[2] Benyon, D., Turner, P., & Turner, S. (2005). Designing interactive systems: People, activities, contexts, technologies. Pearson Education.
	33	+1. Kurniawan, S. (2004). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction by Preece, Sharp and Rogers (2001), ISBN 0471492787.
	34	+2. Benyon, D., Turner, P., & Turner, S. (2005). Designing interactive systems: People, activities, contexts, technologies. Pearson Education.
36	36