Skip to Content

Changes for page Test

Last modified by Clara Stiller on 2022/04/05 13:44
From version Icon 88.1 Icon
edited by Vishruty Mittal
on 2022/04/02 16:00
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version Icon 82.1 Icon
edited by Vishruty Mittal
on 2022/04/02 15:04
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Icon Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
1 -Evaluation is an iterative process where the initial iterations focus on examining if the proposed idea is working as intended. Therefore, we want to first understand how realistic and convincing the provided dialogues and suggested activities are, and would they be able to prevent people from wandering. To examine this, we conduct a small pilot study with students, who role-play having dementia. We then observe their interaction with Pepper to examine the effectiveness of our dialogue flow in preventing people from wandering.
1 +Evaluation is an iterative process where the initial iterations focus on examining if the proposed idea is working as intended. Therefore, we want to first understand how realistic and convincing the provided dialogues and suggested activities are, and would they be able to prevent people from wandering. To examine this, we conduct a small pilot study with students, who role-play having dementia. We then observe their interaction with Pepper to examine the effectiveness of our dialog flow in preventing people from wandering.
2 2  
3 3  = Problem statement and research questions =
4 4  
... ... @@ -22,12 +22,12 @@
22 22  
23 23  = Method =
24 24  
25 -We will conduct a between-subject study with students who play the role of having dementia. Data will be collected with a questionnaire that participants fill out before and after interacting with Pepper. The questionnaire captures different aspects of the conversation along with their mood before and after the interaction with Pepper.
25 +A between-subject study with students who play the role of having dementia. Data will be collected with a questionnaire that participants fill out before and after interacting with Pepper. The questionnaire captures different aspects of the conversation along with their mood before and after the interaction with Pepper.
26 26  
27 27  For our between-subject study, our independent variable is Pepper trying to distract the users by mentioning different activities along with the corresponding music. Through this, we want to measure the effectiveness of music and activities in preventing people from leaving the care home, which is thereby our dependent variable. So we developed 2 different prototype designs-
28 28  
29 -Design X - is the full interaction flow where Pepper suggests activities and uses music to distract people from leaving.
30 -Design Y - is the control condition where pepper simply tries to stop people from leaving by physically keeping its hand on the door.
29 +Design X - It is the full interaction flow where Pepper suggests activities and uses music to distract people from leaving.
30 +Design Y - It is the control condition where pepper simply tries to stop people from leaving by physically keeping its hand on the door.
31 31  
32 32  == Participants ==
33 33  
... ... @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@
192 192  <img src="/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group05/download/Foundation/Operational%20Demands/Personas/WebHome/RQ5.jpg?height=250&rev=1.1" />
193 193  </td>
194 194  <td>
195 -As per these results, we can say that if participants have a predilection toward the suggested activity, there is a higher chance of them staying in. Therefore there is a direct correlation between people staying in and their interest in the activity. After personalization, we expect the score to be further increased.
195 +Comment on the graph
196 196  </td>
197 197  </tr>
198 198  </table>
... ... @@ -207,11 +207,7 @@
207 207  <img src="/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group05/download/Foundation/Operational%20Demands/Personas/WebHome/RQ6.jpg?height=250&rev=1.1" />
208 208  </td>
209 209  <td>
210 -We find that the values for co-presence for both conditions are very similar. This may be attributed to the novelty effect and also to the fact that the face recognition module remains unchanged.
211 -The values for attention allocation are similar, but the controlled flow (design Y) has a higher value. We suspect that the potential reason might be, that people start to lose focus with the elongated conversations. 
212 -
213 -Besides the co-presence, all the observations are not statistically significant because of the high variance in the limited responses. 
214 -
210 +Comment on the graph
215 215  </td>
216 216  </tr>
217 217  </table>
... ... @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@
226 226  <img src="/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group05/download/Foundation/Operational%20Demands/Personas/WebHome/RelScores.jpg?height=250&rev=1.1" />
227 227  </td>
228 228  <td>
229 -We achieved a high Cronbatch alpha score (>60%) for almost all the sections of our analysis. Thereby providing reliability to our evaluation.
225 +Comment on the graph
230 230  </td>
231 231  </tr>
232 232  </table>