Changes for page Claims

Summary

• Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Author

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-XWiki.rsobha
	1	+XWiki.Harmen

Content

...	...	@@ -18,15 +18,30 @@
18	18
19	19	After walking with the MiRo, Constantijn will feel elated that he was able to leave his room at all. Constantijn is known for his eagerness to talk to his co-residents and the MiRo allows him to fulfill his desire. Although he is less bothered by the lack of autonomy, it does provide him with a little boost in self-confidence as he was able to accomplish his goal. However, Constantijn's aversion for dogs will make him want to walk away from the MiRo. This can lead to undesired results such as additional care needed from caretakers and Constantijn may end up being punished by not being able to go out on his own due to non-compliance from his walk with the MiRo. When this scenario occurs, his autonomy will be severely reduced and make him utterly depressed.
20	20
	21	+=== Marcus (PwD who's indifferent about dogs) ===
	22	+
	23	+A major positive effect that the MiRo has on Marcus is that Marcus was able to receive medical assistance, because the MiRo was able to call for help. Walking with the MiRo itself did not provide Marcus with negative effects as the MiRo did what it could do within its limits. A similar accident could have occurred with the presence of a less experienced caretaker who would not notice that Marcus pushed beyond his walking capabilities. Generally, Marcus is not keen on trying again, because of the experience and not necessarily because of the MiRo. In conclusion, PwDs like Marcus may discontinue the use of MiRo for walking, because of external factors that are independent of the MiRo's behavior and appearance. To mitigate the effect of these factors, personalizing the MiRo to the individual PwD's desires and needs is of utmost significance.
	24	+
21	21	== Importance of Autonomy ==
22	22
23	23	Autonomy is important for People with Dementia as that will make them more motivated [[(Deci & Ryan, 1985)>>http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7_5]] to walk with the MiRo. Being connected with oneself and others [[(Han et al., 2015, p. 118)>>https://doi.org/10.1177/1533317515598857]] is crucial for PwD. The lack of autonomy is an insurmountable barrier to overcome for PwD. This is emphasized, because this factor outweighs any initial hurdles that may be introduced with the arrival of new technology such as the MiRo robot.
24	24
	29	+Autonomy not only implies being capable to perform certain actions, but also the freedom to decide to engage in a certain activity. As mentioned by [[(Tyrrell et al., 2006)>>https://doi.org/10.1177/1471301206069915]], patients who reside in a care home experience less freedom of choice and more that any choice regarding their own care is imposed on them by others. In the same study, it was reported that more than a third of patients interviewed (n = 21) were not informed **at all** about their options. So, careful consideration must be applied to present these to a PwD to ensure that they are involved and understand.
	30	+
25	25	== Claim ==
26	26
27		-Given positive and negative effects of walking with the Miro, it is clear that people with opposing views on dogs can still reap the benefits that come with walking with the MiRo. It should be noted though that there are issues, which are mentioned under [[Foundation.Operational Demands.Environments.WebHome||anchor="Technologies"]], which need to be addressed to mitigate any unnerving effects that the MiRo has on PwD and their surrounding stakeholders.
	33	+Given positive and negative effects of walking with WAF, it is clear that people with opposing views on dogs can still reap the benefits that come with walking with the MiRo. It should be noted though that there are issues, which are mentioned under [[Foundation.Operational Demands.Environments.WebHome||anchor="Technologies"]], which need to be addressed to mitigate any unnerving effects that the MiRo has on PwD and their surrounding stakeholders.
28	28
29		-Therefore, we claim that PwD experience an increase in perceived autonomy compared to walking with a caretaker. In order to support the claim, we will experimentally verify whether the MiRo can provide effective guidance on a pre-determined route and that the regained autonomy outweighs delayed assistance from human caretakers in case PwD find themselves in trouble during their walk.
	35	+Therefore, we claim that (1) a PwD experiences an increase in perceived autonomy compared to walking with a caretaker. In order to support the claim, we will experimentally verify whether the MiRo can provide effective guidance on a pre-determined route and that the regained autonomy outweighs delayed assistance from human caretakers in case PwD find themselves in trouble during their walk.
	36	+Furthermore, we claim the following:
	37	+2. A PwD feels increased freedom to take breaks and to interact in a social context during a walk with WAF in comparison with a caretaker
	38	+Especially in the context of PwDs that have an increased feeling of being a burden for their caretakers a walk with WAF lowers the bar to engage in activities on a persons on volition. The dementia and age induced hindrances are partially alleviated with the guidance of either a caretaker or WAF. The induced dependence is intrinsically felt less for a robot than another human.
	39	+Our third and fourth claims are based on the particularities of MiRo being a doglike robot which specify a set of expectations somewhere in between dog behaviour and complex robot behaviour.
	40	+3. WAF can grab the attention of a PwD when needed and with minimal annoyance
	41	+Through its expressive means, WAF can notify a user of the system. Movements of the ears, head, tail, eyes and body indicate attention and direction, but more direct cues such as light, sound and even vibration all aid in guiding the PwD back on track.
	42	+4. A PwD experiences minimal hindrance of WAF in terms of proximity and walking speed
	43	+Where an actual dog would be able to adjust its movement to the dog owner during a walk, WAF needs to be able to tell when the MiRo should be closer to the PwD and when it can be further away.
	44	+The last two claims are based on our design that strikes a balance of typical doglike behaviour and an intelligent and guiding robot companion.
30	30
31	31	Our experimental setup is mentioned under: [[Test.WebHome]]
32	32
...	...	@@ -52,5 +52,3 @@
52	52
53	53	Snoezelen with the MiRo may benefit those who need it. Whether Snoezelen with the MiRo is successful depends on factors such as: inclination of PwD, PwD's first impression (after one session) and customizability. People tend to implicitly reinforce their own biases and may be thrown off by the MiRo's appearance and behavior during Snoezelen. If the aforementioned factors are taken care of, then one can safely claim that PwD will become either more relaxed at best or not bothered at worst by the Miro at all. To emphasize on customizability, it is important to have the Miro programmed to accommodate for sensitivity of each different PwD. As failing to do so, may cause long-term mental trauma or physical injury for PwD. Due to the highly personalized approach in combination with technical limitations, this claim will **not** be evaluated.
54	54
55		-
56		-