Changes for page Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -113,17 +113,8 @@
113	113
114	114	1. Condition 2 - less intelligent prototype:
115	115	Non of the participants who interacted with the less intelligent robot were prevented from leaving.
	116	+**Feedback from Participants:**
116	116
117		-
118		-
119		-**Comparison between intelligent (cond. 1) and less intelligent (cond. 2) prototype**
120		-
121		-{{html}}
122		-<img src="/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group05/download/Test/WebHome/Stay_inside.svg? width="40" height="40"" />
123		-{{/html}}
124		-
125		-Non of the participants from condition 2 could be stopped from going out.
126		-
127	127	**Observations:**
128	128	Problems that occurred during the evaluation
129	129
...	...	@@ -140,19 +140,13 @@
140	140	The reasons for failure in speech recognition are listed above. An unsuitable answer can e.g. be an argument to stay inside, that doesn't fit the participant's reason to leave. Also, some people told in a long sentence that they don't like the provided activity and still want to leave. If the speech recognition fails in this case and pepper understood you would like to do the activity, it seems like it encourages you to leave, instead of doing the activity. This leads to the total opposite of our intention.
141	141	Furthermore, we found out, that our prototype doesn't fit in the environment of the lab. We encourage the participant to do some activities, that they can't do in the lab environment (go to the living room, have a coffee or do a puzzle). If the robot tells asks you if you want to do the activity, most people don't know how to react and are insecure about how to answer. Participants "freeze" in front of the robot or just left the room.
142	142
143		-Condition 2:
144		-Participants assigned to condition 2 weren't convinced to leave. We saw, that most of them tried to continue talking to pepper when it raises its arm to block the door, even though it didn't listen. They were surprised by peppers reaction and asked for a reason why they are not allowed to leave. In order to have a natural conversation flow, the robot should provide an explanation for each scenario that tells why the person is not allowed to leave. This confirms that our approach, to give reason to stay inside, might be helpful to convince PwD to stay inside.
145	145
	135	+
146	146	= Discussion =
147	147
	138	+**Comparison between intelligent and less intelligent prototype**
	139	+[[image:STay_inside.png||height="400"]]
	140	+[[image:Stay_inside.svg||height="400"]]
148	148
149	149
150		-
151		-
152		-
153	153	= Conclusions =
154		-just some notes...
155		-* Evaluation is not significant enough to answer our main question/ goal, due to many issues with speech reco and misunderstandings
156		-* difference in effectiveness between cond 1 and cond 2, but not in all cases
157		-* Confusion + waiting for robot to listen -> bad for PwD, because they are already confused and might not remember to wait for the eyes to turn blue
158		-