Changes for page Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Author

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-XWiki.DoreenMulder
	1	+XWiki.tim_huisman

Content

...	...	@@ -10,7 +10,6 @@
10	10	* Is the MiRo effective in providing guidance to a person with dementia on a predetermined route?
11	11	* Does the increase in perceived autonomy outweigh the possible delayed help when a person with dementia gets in trouble on their walk?
12	12
13		-
14	14	= Method =
15	15
16	16	To this effect, we would like to invite users to participate in a usability study. In the study, we will assess our research question by dividing the participants into two groups: one with a //caretaker// and one with a //MiRo//. The former group will enact the activity of walking in the current setting and the latter group will do the equivalent with the robot. Afterwards, both groups are assessed by means of Likert-scales to measure the increase.
...	...	@@ -23,12 +23,10 @@
23	23
24	24	== Experimental design ==
25	25
26		-The first two questions can be answered using a within-subject design in order to be able to measure the //increase// per subject. The learning effect will be mitigated, because the two juxtaposed settings are vastly different. So, there is no advantage for the participant to be subjected to two conditions serially.
	25	+The main research question can be answered using a within-subject design in order to be able to measure the //increase// per subject. The learning effect will be mitigated, because the two juxtaposed settings are vastly different. So, there is no advantage for the participant to be subjected to two conditions serially.
27	27
28		-The third question is posed as a exploratory question. There will be no alternative condition. The expression of familiarity will be recorded in the form of audio recording which are to be transcribed afterwards. Naturally, the recordings will be deleted subsequently to comply with GDPR.
	27	+The experiment will be recorded in the form of audio recording which are to be transcribed afterwards. Naturally, the recordings will be deleted subsequently to comply with GDPR.
29	29
30		-The last question is also exploratory. Where subjects are divided into groups according to a between-subject design with the purpose of exposing one group to a stationary robot
31		-
32	32	== Tasks ==
33	33
34	34	We break up our experiment into the following tasks:
...	...	@@ -72,7 +72,20 @@
72	72
73	73
74	74	= Discussion =
	72	+Is het erg om om een rank te vragen aan PwD's? Iets tussen 1-5 of very bad en very good. Zo nee, lijkt het me beter om vraag 3 in die vorm te stellen
75	75
	74	+3. Do you consider the guiding agent to be helpful in the following aspects?
	75	+- Wat wordt er bedoeld met "was the guiding agent helpful in paying attention to its user"
	76	+-> ik denk dat dit eerder iets als "Did the guiding agent succeed remaining near its user" of iets in de trend van erbij blijven
76	76
	78	+- Ik denk niet dat we uit een wizard of oz experiment een goed antwoord gaan krijgen uit Getting the attention of healthcare workers, tenzij we een experiment hebben waarmee we kunnen testen of MiRo/de armband een val kan herkennen
77	77
	80	+- Misschien kunnen we nog een 'Getting attention' vraag stellen om te testen hoe goed het aandacht trekken als de patient van het pad afwijkt werkt
	81	+
	82	+
	83	+4. De scale hier is heel nice. In charge, happy, afraid lijken me goed. Tired kan er misschien uit blijven want dat zou meer afhangen van de lengte van de walk en daar evalueren we nog niet op.
	84	+
	85	+Laatste remark: misschien nog een vraag over hoe het lopen met een hond-achtige robot was - zorgt het voor de nostalgie zoals wij verwachten?
	86	+
	87	+
78	78	= Conclusions =