Changes for page Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
27	27
28	28	== Experimental design ==
29	29
30		-For the experiment, we used a within-subject design. All of the participants interacted with both versions of the robot, with half of the participants interacting with version 1 first and then version 2, and the other half in reverse order. This was done to counter-balance the carryover effects. Snacks were made available for the participants, in case they were prompted and were hungry. The participants were unaware of the possibility of eating snacks, to prevent disturbing the interaction with the robot. Otherwise the subjects would have been primed for eating, which would have biased the results and hide the effect of the robotic interaction.
	30	+For the experiment, we used a within-subject design. All of the participants interacted with both versions of the robot, with half of the participants interacting with version 1 first and then version 2, and the other half in reverse order. This was done to counter-balance the carryover effects. Snacks were made available for the participants, in case they were prompted and were hungry. They were fully aware of them and some of the questionnaire prompts might have given them an idea of what our experiment is about (or at least that it's related to food), which might have skewed our results.
31	31
32	32	== Tasks ==
33	33
...	...	@@ -41,17 +41,17 @@
41	41
42	42	The procedure was conducted as follows:
43	43
44		-1. Welcome participant and explain what they are going to be doing.
	44	+1. Welcome participants and explain what they are going to be doing.
45	45	1. Have them sign the permission form.
46		-1. Complete questionnaire 1 regarding their emotional state (control).
47		-1. Have an interaction with version A of the robot.
	46	+1. Complete questionnaire 1 regarding their emotional state and hunger scale (control).
	47	+1. Have interaction with version A of the robot.
48	48	1. Complete questionnaire 2 (extended version).
49	49	1. Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions).
50		-1. Have an interaction with version B of the robot.
	50	+1. Have interaction with version B of the robot.
51	51	1. Complete questionnaire 3 (extended version).
52	52	1. Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions).
53	53
54		-We used the "Wizard of Oz" method for recognizing agreement and disagreement, to make sure that the whole process did not depend on voice recognition being good enough. In practice, this meant that someone was pressing "y" and "n" on the keyboard according to the participants answers in a place the participant did not see, such as behind them.
	54	+We used the "Wizard of Oz" method for differentiating agreement and disagreement, to make sure that the whole process did not depend on voice recognition being good enough, and to have an overall smoother interaction. In practice, this meant that someone was pressing "y" and "n" on the keyboard according to the participants' answers, in a place the participant did not see, such as behind them. The robot's responses were hardcoded, with a few different branches available to take into account the variety of answers the participants would give. The only issue encountered was some connectivity delays at times, which only slightly affected a few of the interactions.
55	55
56	56	== Material ==
57	57