Skip to Content

Changes for page Test

Last modified by Sofia Kostakonti on 2022/04/05 14:08
From version Icon 69.1 Icon
edited by Veikko Saikkonen
on 2022/04/01 15:23
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version Icon 66.1 Icon
edited by Veikko Saikkonen
on 2022/04/01 14:57
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Icon Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -109,6 +109,7 @@
109 109  * 32% ate
110 110  * 67% of those would not have eaten without the robot
111 111  
112 +
112 112  == Music ==
113 113  
114 114  {{html}}
... ... @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@
116 116  {{/html}}
117 117  
118 118  (% style="text-align:center" %)
119 -Figure 2: Answers of the test personas regarding music
120 +Figure 4: Answers of the test personas regarding music
120 120  
121 121  
122 122  == EVEA (Mood) ==
... ... @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@
126 126  {{/html}}
127 127  
128 128  (% style="text-align:center" %)
129 -Figure 3: Median measured moods for the simple version of the robot
130 +Figure 2: Median measured moods for the simple version of the robot
130 130  
131 131  {{html}}
132 132  <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/MoodChangeSmart.png?rev=1.1" alt="Measured moods and changes for the advanced version of the robot" style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=750/>
... ... @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@
133 133  {{/html}}
134 134  
135 135  (% style="text-align:center" %)
136 -Figure 4: Median measured moods for the advanced version of the robot
137 +Figure 3: Median measured moods for the advanced version of the robot
137 137  
138 138  (% style="text-align:center" %)
139 139  Table 1: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the hypothesis that the mood changed during the interaction with the simple robot
... ... @@ -214,16 +214,8 @@
214 214  
215 215  In improving the eating, it seems that both robots have limited success in causing the people to eat as seen in Figure 1, they could cause the patients to eat more regularly, if triggered by timers or other suitable systems. It also seems that the advanced robot is better in the reminding, by a slight margin. However, the long term effects of reminding should be researched more to conclude whether the usage of the demonstrated robot platform or similar would cause the patients to eat more regularly. It is also unclear how the test setup and the limited choice of food affected the eating.
216 216  
217 -Based on the answers of the participants regarding music seen in Figure 2, it seems that most of them were either indifferent or liked the music. Also, as the test personnel find the advanced robot more likeable with a 5% confidence limit (Table 7), and the advanced version was the only version with music, it seems likely that the music does make the interaction more pleasant for the personas. However, some of the likeability might be due to the other advanced features of the robot and thus more research is needed to conclude the effect of the music.
218 218  
219 -The EVEA and partial Godspeed result can be seen in Figures 3-7 and Tables 1-7. The results show that with reasonable confidence (5% confidence limit), both versions of the robot decreased sadness and anxiety in the test personas. Hints are shown (10% confidence limit) that the advanced robot also decreases feelings of anger and increases happiness, while the simple robot fails to show similar results. The choice to compare the changes happening during the interaction was to show the
220 220  
221 -A Wilcoxon signed rank test for the partial Godspeed test shows in Table 7 that with high confidence (1% confidence limit), the intelligent robot is more likeable in comparison to the simple robot.
222 -
223 -
224 -
225 -
226 -
227 227  = Discussion =
228 228  
229 229