| ... |
... |
@@ -2,7 +2,16 @@ |
| 2 |
2 |
|
| 3 |
3 |
<include a short summary of the claims to be tested, i.e., the effects of the functions in a specfic use case> |
| 4 |
4 |
|
|
5 |
+<nothing |
| 5 |
5 |
|
|
7 |
+The main claims we are looking to test with this testing procedure are related to the functionality and usability of the robot. |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+The participants will be other students taking the course. The participants will be placed in the shoes of a PwD and be tasked with completing several basic actions with the robot while impaired in several known ways to simulate the difficulties of a PwD. |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+After the experiment, the participants will fill out a survey and be asked some more open ended questions with the purpose of understanding how the interaction with the robot went, and whether they have anything that they find concerning regarding the possible use of the system and its functions in a real life setting. |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+On top of this, a short questionnaire will be sent to several care homes throughout the Netherlands in hopes to get a general idea whether the caretakers at the facilities think that the system would be a good fit for the proposed use case. |
|
14 |
+ |
| 6 |
6 |
= 2. Method = |
| 7 |
7 |
|
| 8 |
8 |
The prototypes are evaluated in a simulated manner, with participants pretending to be PwDs and conducting in-person experiments. |
| ... |
... |
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ |
| 13 |
13 |
|
| 14 |
14 |
== 2.2 Experimental design == |
| 15 |
15 |
|
|
25 |
+For the experiment, we used a within-subject design. All of the participants interacted with both versions of the robot, with half of the participants interacting with version 1 first and then version 2, and the other half in reverse order. This was done to counter-balance the carryover effects. |
| 16 |
16 |
|
| 17 |
17 |
== 2.3 Tasks == |
| 18 |
18 |
|
| ... |
... |
@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@ |
| 40 |
40 |
|
| 41 |
41 |
* ((( |
| 42 |
42 |
Go to the Games section and check what is included there. |
|
53 |
+ |
|
54 |
+<this might not be part of the experiment as it might not get implemented in time) |
| 43 |
43 |
))) |
| 44 |
44 |
|
| 45 |
45 |
==== Medicine reminders ==== |
| ... |
... |
@@ -77,7 +77,6 @@ |
| 77 |
77 |
|
| 78 |
78 |
== 2.5 Procedure == |
| 79 |
79 |
|
| 80 |
|
- |
| 81 |
81 |
The procedure was conducted as follows: |
| 82 |
82 |
|
| 83 |
83 |
1. Welcome participants and give an introduction. |
| ... |
... |
@@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ |
| 95 |
95 |
|
| 96 |
96 |
== 2.6 Material == |
| 97 |
97 |
|
|
109 |
+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. |
|
110 |
+1. Pepper robot. <not sure how to elaborate on this> |
| 98 |
98 |
|
| 99 |
99 |
= 3. Results = |
| 100 |
100 |
|
