Changes for page Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -105,7 +105,6 @@
105	105	1. CL11: The PwD feels content.
106	106	There is a question related to this in the questionnaire.
107	107
108		-
109	109	== Method ==
110	110
111	111	In order to collect qualitative data, we prepared two questionnaires to give to the participants: the affect assessment questionnaire and the system assessment questionnaire. All questionnaire questions are expressed in the form of statements and the participant can express one out of seven levels of agreement/disagreement from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The only exception is the additional remarks field at the end of the system assessment questionnaire, where the participants can freely put any comment/remark/feedback they have on the experiment.
...	...	@@ -149,9 +149,7 @@
149	149	1. How was Pepper's ability to guide the participant through the task? [Questions: 4]
150	150
151	151	Question 1 is used to take into consideration the expected baseline enjoyment of the task for each participant.
152		-We also intended to use question 2 for similar subgroups, but there were not enough different answers to get a significant number of participants in each subgroup.
153	153
154		-
155	155	== Participants ==
156	156
157	157	In our situation, our participants are 24 students from TUD. Most of them come from Computer Science and/or from the SCE class. One third of them are female and two thirds male, so gender balance is decent.
...	...	@@ -161,18 +161,15 @@
161	161
162	162	Since our evaluating process is relatively short, we use within-subject, which means each participant goes through all conditions. In this way, our experiment tends to have more statistical power and less variability.
163	163
164		-
165	165	== Tasks ==
166	166
167	167	All participants will go through our designed testing process, which combines a calendar event reminder and an activity breakdown.
168	168	Pepper will propose the activity to the participant, then go step by step with them through the activity.
169	169
170		-
171	171	== Measures ==
172	172
173	173	We measure the mood of the participants through the affect assessment questionnaires. We also measure some aspects of the interaction between Pepper and the participant through the system assessment questionnaire. Both are qualitative data, as the participant gives an answer ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
174	174
175		-
176	176	== Procedure ==
177	177
178	178	Before the experiment, we explain to the participants the purpose of our evaluation (context of SCE class, our prototype).
...	...	@@ -183,7 +183,6 @@
183	183	After the activity is finished by the participant, they fill the second affect questionnaire and the system assessment questionnaire.
184	184	After this is done, we thank them for their participation and the evaluation session is over.
185	185
186		-
187	187	== Material ==
188	188
189	189	1. Consent form. To protect the privacy of participants and ensure the evaluation process goes smoothly, we will ask participants to sign a consent form, indicating they are willing to take part in the evaluation and the data gathered from the experiment will be analyzed by researchers. The consent form is accessed online via a QR code.
...	...	@@ -191,7 +191,6 @@
191	191	1. Pepper robot. Our robot is programmed using Choregraphe. The robot will have the same behaviour for every participant. However, the input data will be entered by the HCP (and potentially the relatives).
192	192	1. Gardening stuff. In order to conduct the activity, we bought and brought basic stuff required for gardening (soil, pot, seeds, etc).
193	193
194		-
195	195	== Results ==
196	196
197	197	The following sections contains the results gather from the affect and system assessment. Apart from the printed version being included below, the results are also included as interactive graphs. To get a better version with more information (data point information on mouse hovering for instance), simply click the provided link for each graph.
...	...	@@ -601,7 +601,6 @@
601	601
602	602	This graph shows that the trust in Pepper was highly dependent on whether the participants enjoyed the activity or not.
603	603
604		-
605	605	== Discussion ==
606	606
607	607	=== Evaluation key properties ===
...	...	@@ -628,6 +628,7 @@
628	628	Regarding social assessment, the participants barely agree that Pepper cared about helping them. This may be caused by the fact that most of them are Computer Science and/or SCE class students. Such students are very conscious that Pepper is nothing more than the behaviour we implemented. Some participants even tried to find edge cases to test the answers of Pepper. It would be very useful to conduct the same experiment on average people randomly chosen to see whether the answers are the same. If they are, then that would be a good point to improve.
629	629	Finally, still in terms of social assessment, whether the participants would trust Pepper with more important activities greatly depends on whether they like gardening or not, which highlights the importance of having specific tasks for the specific patients.
630	630
	622	+
631	631	=== Observations ===
632	632
633	633	We also made some observations while monitoring the evaluation sessions.
...	...	@@ -635,6 +635,13 @@
635	635	We also noticed that participants had some difficulties interacting with Pepper in the beginning. Specifically, and although we did mention it to them, they very often spoke while the eyes were not blue. Since Pepper was not listening, they often got confused and did not know what to do. Most often, they simply repeated their answer, and then it worked. Sometimes, we had to remind them about the blue eyes. Usually, after a couple of steps of the activity, they got used to it. Overall, the ease of interaction with Pepper greatly improved over time.
636	636
637	637
	630	+
	631	+
	632	+
	633	+
	634	+
	635	+
	636	+
638	638	== Conclusions ==
639	639
640	640	The results from the mood questionnaire seem to support our claims CL10: the PwD feels reassured and CL11: the PwD feels content.
...	...	@@ -648,7 +648,6 @@
648	648
649	649	We did not have any question explictly aimed at targeting our claim CL08. However, frustration, annoyance and pressure are often linked to a lack of understanding from the other part. We can combine these with the question about whether Pepper cared about helping the participants, and with our observations during the experiment. When aggregated together, it seems that generally speaking, the participants felt understood. This supports our claim CL08: the PwD feels understood.
650	650
651		-
652	652	== Limitations ==
653	653
654	654	Although there seems to be a slight general trend that shows that our claim are satisfied, there are many limitations to take into account that reduce the significance of the results.