Changes for page Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Author

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-XWiki.Tim_Huisman2
	1	+XWiki.DoreenMulder

Content

...	...	@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
24	24
25	25	== Experimental design ==
26	26
27		-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. In addition to the questionnaire, notes will be taken during the experiment of the observations of the participant's interactions with WAF.
	27	+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. In addition to the questionnaire, notes will be taken during the experiment of the observations of the participant's interactions with WAF (Walking Assisting Friend).
28	28
29	29	== Ethical Approval ==
30	30
...	...	@@ -36,13 +36,17 @@
36	36
37	37	* Walking a route
38	38	* Wandering off during a walk
	39	+* Falling and alerting a caretaker
39	39
40	40	Walking a route
41		-The person with dementia will walk a route guided by either a caretaker or by WAF.
	42	+The person with dementia will walk a route guided by either a caretaker or by the MiRo.
42	42
43	43	Wandering off during a walk
44		-A person with dementia may become lost in their current surroundings. They might wander off from the predetermined route. Depending on the study group, either the caretaker or WAF will guide the person back to the route.
	45	+A person with dementia may become lost in their current surroundings. They might wander off from the predetermined route. Depending on the study group, either the caretaker or the MiRo will guide the person back to the route.
45	45
	47	+Falling and alerting a caretaker
	48	+When a person with dementia gets in trouble when walking around, it is very important that they receive immediate attention.
	49	+
46	46	== Measures ==
47	47
48	48	To measure the effectiveness of our solution, we use a questionnaire. Since people with dementia may experience difficulties with expressing themselves in a conversation, this questionnaire is lead by an interviewer [[(Neerincx et al., to appear)>>]]. A caretaker may also be present to help the person with dementia accurately express themselves.
...	...	@@ -49,20 +49,21 @@
49	49
50	50	== Procedure ==
51	51
52		-The procedure is that the person with dementia is walking with WAF. The PwD is given WAF and the proximity, WAF has a pre-programmed route to walk. The PwD is asked to walk with the dog. While they are walking the dog, they are observed by a separate observer, carefully noting down any remarkable events. The emotional state of the PwD is actively monitored by looking at facial expressions. Furthermore, the researchers will actively check how easily the PwD interact with WAF to check the familiarity. When the PwD is done walking, some small questions will be asked to check the satisfaction, autonomy and familiarity.
	56	+The procedure is that the person with dementia is walking with the Miro. The PwD is given the MiRo and the bracelet/leash, the MiRo has a pre-programmed route to walk. The PwD is asked to walk with the dog. While they are walking the dog, they are observed, preferably by cameras as to simulate the situation how the MiRo should be used. The emotional state of the PwD is actively monitored by looking at facial expressions. Furthermore, the researchers will actively check how easily the PwD interact with the MiRo to check the familiarity. When the PwD is done walking, some small questions will be asked to check the satisfaction, autonomy and familiarity.
53	53
54		-Functions like when an elderly person falls or when they walk in the wrong direction will not forcibly be tested with PwD as this might create a dangerous situation. These functions will be tested in advance with the use of "Dogfeeding". Other people from the development team will test these functions.
	58	+Functions like when an elderly person falls or when they walk the wrong direction will not forcibly be tested with PwD as this might create a dangerous situation. These functions will be tested in advance with the use of "Dogfeeding". Other people from the development-team will test these functions.
55	55
56	56	== Material ==
57	57
58	58	The items necessary for the tests are the following
59	59
60		-* A MiRo + bracelet
61		-* Caretaker
	64	+* MiRo + bracelet/leash
	65	+* Camera to observe
	66	+* Caretaker in a nearby room in case of emergency
62	62
63	63	= Results =
64	64
65		-We asked participants about their sense of being in charge, happiness, safety and trust when walking with MiRo and with the caretaker. In the graphs below we show each sense compared between the two guiding agents.
	70	+We asked participants about there sense of being in charge, happiness, safety and trust when walking with MiRo and with the caretaker. In the graphs below we show each sense compared between the two guiding agents.
66	66
67	67	{{html}}
68	68	<table width='80%'>
...	...	@@ -106,11 +106,9 @@
106	106	= Discussion =
107	107
108	108	Through this test, we aim to answer the question: "Does walking with the MiRo increase the perceived autonomy of people with dementia, compared to walking under guidance of a caretaker?"
109		-We see that in the current state of our prototype, this is not the case. The caretaker is preferred when asked if the user feels in charge, feels safe, and feels trustworthy. However, we note that the MiRo does slightly outperform the caretaker in regards to happiness. We think that further development is needed to accurately gauge if walking with a MiRo will eventually score equally or better compared to walking with a caretaker.
110		-We see flaws in the limited testing setup that was available to us. With only eight participants, it is nearly impossible to draw conclusions from the experiment. Additionally, these participants were actors and not real people with dementia, which may have caused bias in our results. Finally, while we intended to have the participants walk through a hallway accompanied by MiRo, we only had a meeting room available to conduct the experiment in.
	114	+We can conclude that in the current state of our prototype, this is not the case. The caretaker is preferred when asked if the user feels in charge, feels safe, and feels trustworthy. However, we note that the MiRo does slightly outperform the caretaker in regards to happiness. We think that further development is needed to accurately gauge if walking with a MiRo will eventually score equally or better compared to walking with a caretaker.
111	111
112	112
113		-
114	114	==== Inclusivity ====
115	115
116	116	In addition to the questionnaire, we conducted a short interview with our participant who is hard-of-hearing. Their study was conducted without them wearing their hearing aids.
...	...	@@ -120,8 +120,3 @@
120	120
121	121
122	122	= Conclusions =
123		-In conclusion, the prototype as-is is not capable of outperforming the benefits of a traditional walk with a caretaker. Additional work is needed to bring the prototype to a state of usability where users walking with MiRo can feel trust, happiness, safety, and being in charge. We would like to conduct a similar experiment with real people with dementia, in a setting that is familiar to them, to properly simulate a realistic use case. In the future, we would increase the number of participants to gain better insights into the usability of our prototype.
124		-
125		-
126		-
127		-