| ... |
... |
@@ -1,40 +1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-Quintana et al. (2020) designed questions based on the most important quality attributes to evaluate how the application works for people with mild cognitive impairment. |
| 2 |
|
- |
| 3 |
|
-(potential questions tailored to our case) |
| 4 |
|
- |
| 5 |
|
-* ((( |
| 6 |
|
-How satisfied are you with the robot’s possibility to support you? |
| 7 |
|
-))) |
| 8 |
|
-* ((( |
| 9 |
|
-How well does the robot fulfill your expectations? |
| 10 |
|
-))) |
| 11 |
|
-* ((( |
| 12 |
|
-Imagine a perfect robot for this task. How far away from it is the robot you are using today? |
| 13 |
|
-))) |
| 14 |
|
-* ((( |
| 15 |
|
-I find the robot easily accessible for people with dementia. |
| 16 |
|
-))) |
| 17 |
|
-* ((( |
| 18 |
|
-I feel that I can trust the robot and that it is safe to use. |
| 19 |
|
-))) |
| 20 |
|
-* ((( |
| 21 |
|
-I find it easy to understand how to operate the robot. |
| 22 |
|
-))) |
| 23 |
|
-* ((( |
| 24 |
|
-I am able to understand all the information presented by the robot. |
| 25 |
|
-))) |
| 26 |
|
-* ((( |
| 27 |
|
-I feel that the robot gave me better control over my daily situation. |
| 28 |
|
-))) |
| 29 |
|
- |
| 30 |
|
-The alternatives the users could give to all the above were the following: 1 = Strongly disagree; 2 = Disagree.; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 4 = Agree; 5 = Strongly agree. |
| 31 |
|
- |
| 32 |
|
- |
| 33 |
|
-The System Usability Scale (SUS) is a dependable instrument for testing usability. It comprises of 10 questions with five response options which range from strongly agree to strongly disagree for responders (Jordan et al., 1996). |
| 34 |
|
- |
| 35 |
|
-(see the attachment for the 10 questions) |
| 36 |
|
- |
| 37 |
|
- |
| 38 |
|
-1. Quintana M, Anderberg P, Sanmartin Berglund J, Frögren J, Cano N, Cellek S, Zhang J, Garolera M. Feasibility-Usability Study of a Tablet App Adapted Specifically for Persons with Cognitive Impairment—SMART4MD (Support Monitoring and Reminder Technology for Mild Dementia). //International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health//. 2020; 17(18):6816. [[https:~~/~~/doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186816>>https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186816]] |
| 39 |
|
- |
| 40 |
|
-2. Brooke, J. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. //Usability Eval. Ind. **1996**, 189//, 4–7. |
