Changes for page Test

Last modified by Sofia Kostakonti on 2022/04/05 14:08

From 67.1 to 66.1 From 72.1 to 71.1

From version

71.1

edited by Veikko Saikkonen
on 2022/04/01 15:29

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

67.1

edited by Veikko Saikkonen
on 2022/04/01 14:57

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

@@ -109,6 +109,7 @@
  * 32% ate
  * 67% of those would not have eaten without the robot
++
  == Music ==
  {{html}}
@@ -177,13 +177,6 @@
  |Statistic|32
  |P-value|0.09
--(% style="text-align:center" %)
--Table 7: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the hypothesis that the mood changes with the simple and advanced robots during the interaction are different
--
--|=Mood|=Happiness|=Anxiety|=Sadness|=Anger
--|Statistic|92|49|85|69
--|P-value|0.92|0.07|0.71|0.31
--
  == Godspeed ==
  {{html}}
@@ -209,7 +209,7 @@
  (% style="text-align:center" %)
--Table 8: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the advanced robot scored higher in the perceived dimensions
++Table 7: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the advanced robot scored higher in the perceived dimensions
  |=Dimension|=Likeability|=Intelligence
  |Statistic|36|70
@@ -221,13 +221,8 @@
  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.
--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.
--The EVEA and partial Godspeed result can be seen in Figures 3-7 and Tables 1-8. 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. However, in Table 7 we can see that the statistical differences in the mood differences during the interactions with the different versions are not highly significant.
--A Wilcoxon signed rank test for the partial Godspeed test shows in Table 8 that with high confidence (1% confidence limit), the intelligent robot is more likeable in comparison to the simple robot. With these results it is likely that the more advanced robot is slightly preferrable and the personas might experience less negative emotions after the interaction with the robots, but it is slightly unclear if the effect is more powerful with the advanced robot.
--
--
  = Discussion =