Changes for page Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -19,76 +19,80 @@
19	19
20	20	= Method =
21	21
22		-The prototype is evaluated with an in-person experiment with multiple participants.
	22	+The prototype is evaluated with an in-person experiment with multiple participants. In the experiment, the participants will be asked to pretend to be PwD and act accordingly with/without the prototype.
23	23
24	24	== Participants ==
25	25
26		-As there are practical difficulties with conducting the experiment with actual people with dementia due to both time constraints and COVID, our participants' group consists of peers from other groups and friends. In total we had 19 people take part in our experiment.
	26	+As there are practical difficulties with conducting the experiment with actual people with dementia due to both time constraints and COVID, our participants' group will consist of peers from other groups and friends, who will act as if they are older people with dementia. We plan to gather around 20 people for our experiments.
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 the 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 they ewre 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	+We will be using a within-subject design. In the experiment all of the participants will interact with both versions of the robot, with half of the participants interacting with the version 1 first and then version 2, and the other half in reverse order, to counter-balance the carryover effects. Snacks will be made available for the participants, in case they're prompted and they're hungry. The participants will be unaware of the possibility of eating snacks, to prevent disturbing the interaction with the robot. Otherwise the subjects could be primed for eating, which would bias the results and hide the effect of the robotic interaction.
31	31
32	32	== Tasks ==
33	33
34		-The participant interacted with the robot, which was programmed to engage in a lunch discourse. Two versions were implemented: the first version asks basic questions about mealtime, mostly acting as a reminder for the PwD to have lunch (basically an alarm clock). The second is our original implementation of it with the more sophisticated discourse and music.
	34	+The participant will have to interact with the robot, which is programmed to engage in a lunch discourse. Two versions will be implemented: the first version will ask basic questions about mealtime, mostly acting as a reminder for the PwD to have lunch (alarm clock). The second will be our original implementation of it with the more sophisticated discourse and music.
35	35
36	36	== Measures ==
37	37
38		-We measured the effectiveness of the discourse, both physically and emotionally. Our quantitative measure was whether the person ate the lunch they were supposed to have eaten, and the qualitative measure was the emotions that the PwD experienced before, during, and after the interaction. The qualitative measures were recorded with a simple questionnaire. Some people were not hungry enough to be prompted to have something to eat, which disturbed the results. However we did measure whether the robot reminded someone of their hunger and if they ate.
	38	+We plan on measuring the effectiveness of the discourse, both physically and emotionally. Our quantitative measure is whether the person ate the lunch they were supposed to have eaten, and the qualitative measure is the emotions that the PwD experienced before, during, and after the interaction. The qualitative measures will be recorded with a simple questionnaire. Depending on the time of the experiments, we assume that people might also not be hungry enough to be prompted to have something to eat, which might disturb the results. We do plan however to measure whether the robot will remind someone of their hunger and have them eat.
39	39
40	40	== Procedure ==
41	41
42		-The procedure was conducted as follows:
	42	+* Welcome Participants and explain what they are going to be doing.
	43	+* Have them sign the permission form.
	44	+* Participants complete a questionnaire(A) regarding their emotional state (control).
	45	+* Have version A of interaction with the robot.
	46	+* Complete questionnaire(extended version).
	47	+* Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions).
	48	+* Have version B of interaction with the robot.
	49	+* Complete questionnaire(extended version).
	50	+* Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions).
43	43
44		-1. Welcome participant and explain what they are going to be doing.
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.
48		-1. Complete questionnaire 2 (extended version).
49		-1. Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions).
50		-1. Have an interaction with version B of the robot.
51		-1. Complete questionnaire 3 (extended version).
52		-1. Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions).
	52	+== Material ==
53	53
	54	+For the experiments, we'll be using the NAO robot platform, as well as a laptop for the participants to complete the questionnaires on. The questionnaire will be a combination of questions regarding the emotional state of the participants, their interaction with the robot, and the music included in the interaction. Food will be made available to see and measure how much people will eat.
54	54
55		-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.
	56	+Questionnaires:
	57	+Consent Form and Disclaimers
	58	+8 questions from the [[EVEA>>https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/39-2013-04-19-EVEA%20-%20Datasheet.pdf]] questionnaire
	59	+4 questions from the [[Godspeed>>https://www.bartneck.de/2008/03/11/the-godspeed-questionnaire-series/]] questionnaire
	60	+3 food-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale)
	61	+2 music-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale)
56	56
57		-== Material ==
	63	+== Practicalities ==
58	58
59		-For the experiments, we used the NAO robot platform, and a laptop to control it with. The participants completed the questionnaires on their phones by scanning a QR code. The questionnaires are a combination of questions regarding the emotional state of the participants, their interaction with the robot, and the music included in the interaction. Stroopwafels and water in a clean cup were made available to see and measure how much people ate.
	65	+Beforehand:
60	60
61		-Below are listed the contents of the three questionnares:
	67	+* Do a practice round by ourselves
	68	+** Film this
	69	+* Contact other groups and decide on a time slot
	70	+** Might be better to reserve in 10 min slots, so that people don't have to wait so much
	71	+** If possible, this could be done in parallel with another groups testing
	72	+* Reserve lab
	73	+* Buy snacks
62	62
63		-Questionnare 1:
64		-* Consent Form and Disclaimers
65		-* Control for robot version A
66		-** 8 questions from the [[EVEA>>https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/39-2013-04-19-EVEA%20-%20Datasheet.pdf]] questionnaire
67		-** 4 questions from the [[Godspeed>>https://www.bartneck.de/2008/03/11/the-godspeed-questionnaire-series/]] questionnaire
	75	+During:
68	68
69		-Questionnare 2:
70		-* Questions about robot version A
71		-** 3 food-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale)
72		-** 2 music-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale)
73		-* Control for robot version B
74		-** 8 questions from the [[EVEA>>https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/39-2013-04-19-EVEA%20-%20Datasheet.pdf]] questionnaire
75		-** 4 questions from the [[Godspeed>>https://www.bartneck.de/2008/03/11/the-godspeed-questionnaire-series/]] questionnaire
	77	+1. Give starting questionnare to fill while people are waiting for the previous participant
	78	+2. Guide the participant to the testing spot
	79	+3. Inform the participant where the snacks are
	80	+4. Run the first version
	81	+5. Give the mid-questionnare
	82	+6. Run the other test
	83	+7. Conduct the questionnare for the participant
	84	+8. Give the participant the end-questionnare
76	76
77		-Questionnare 3:
78		-* Questions about robot version B
79		-** 3 food-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale)
80		-** 2 music-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale)
	86	+Other practicalities during:
81	81
82		-== Practicalities ==
	88	+* We will use the "Wizard of Oz" method for recognizing agreement and disagreement, to make sure that the whole process does not depend on voice recegnition being good enough
	89	+** Someone will press eg. "y" and "n" on the keyboard according to the participants answers
	90	+* We will change the order in which the smart and basic versions are for each participant
	91	+** this way if someone doesn't show up, we don't get skewed amounts
83	83
84		-Before the experiment we:
	93	+After:
85	85
86		-* did a practice round by ourselves
87		-** This was filmed to have a controlled performance to give an example of the experiment if needed
88		-* contacted other groups and decide on scheduling
89		-** Each participant was booked a 20 min slot
90		-* reserved the lab
91		-* bought the stroopwafels
	95	+* Analyze results
92	92
93	93	= Results =
94	94