Wiki source code of b. Test

Version 21.3 by Karthik Prakash on 2023/04/08 10:36

Hide last authors
Ruud de Jong 1.1 1 = 1. Introduction =
2
Demi Tao 8.1 3 In section [[a. Prototype>>3\. Evaluation.a\. Prototype.WebHome]] two versions of the robot were presented, one with voice functionality and one without.
Ruud de Jong 1.1 4
Arber Demi 2.2 5 The main claims we are looking to test with this testing procedure are related to the functionality and usability of the robot.
6
Demi Tao 8.1 7 The participants will be other students taking this 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.
Arber Demi 2.2 8
Demi Tao 8.1 9 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.
Arber Demi 2.2 10
Demi Tao 8.1 11 On top of this, a short questionnaire will be sent to several care homes throughout the Netherlands in hopes to get a general idea of whether the caretakers at the facilities think that the system would be a good fit for the proposed use case.
Arber Demi 2.2 12
Ruud de Jong 1.1 13 = 2. Method =
14
Demi Tao 8.1 15 The prototypes are evaluated in a simulated manner and conducted in-person experiments. Participants will be given a [[persona>>doc:Main.sdf.Persona Scenarios.WebHome]] to play act.
Ruud de Jong 1.1 16
17 == 2.1 Participants ==
18
Demi Tao 8.1 19 All students in CS4235 Socio-Cognitive Engineering (2022-2023) in TU Delft are invited to test the robot. In the end, 14 students are presented.
Ruud de Jong 1.1 20
21 == 2.2 Experimental design ==
22
Demi Tao 8.1 23 Prior to the experiment, participants were asked to simulate the experience of a person with dementia. Participants who wore glasses were asked to remove them, while those who did not were provided with short-sighted or far-sighted glasses to replicate the blurred vision and degraded perception that is common in PwDs. Additionally, their index and middle fingers were taped together to simulate the difficulty in controlling movements that many PwDs experience.
Ruud de Jong 1.1 24
Demi Tao 8.1 25 For this experiment, we used a between-subject design. The control group interacted solely with the stand-alone application, which represented the robot without voice functionality, and received guidance through a single task paper. In contrast, the experimental group engaged with the fully-functional robot, which provided audio instructions, guidance, and encouragement.
26
Ruud de Jong 1.1 27 == 2.3 Tasks ==
28
Demi Tao 2.1 29 In the user test, the following tasks were asked of the participants:
Ruud de Jong 1.1 30
Demi Tao 2.1 31 ==== Reminders for activities ====
32
33 * (((
Karthik Prakash 10.1 34 Add a reminder that a relative will pay a visit on Sunday with the format as "<relative name> will visit you on Sunday at 3 pm for some tea". Set the reminder to remind you 10 min before that.
Demi Tao 2.1 35 )))
36 * (((
Karthik Prakash 10.1 37 Check the remainder for this week and verify the new remainder added for the event.
Demi Tao 2.1 38 )))
39
40 ==== Personal profile ====
41
42 * (((
Karthik Prakash 10.1 43 Browse through relative profiles and read the info.
44 )))
45 * (((
Demi Tao 2.1 46 Add relatives as a contact in the "profile" section.
47 )))
48
49 ==== Memory games ====
50
51 * (((
Demi Tao 8.1 52 Go to the Games section and play the game.
Demi Tao 2.1 53 )))
54
55 ==== Medicine reminders ====
56
Karthik Prakash 10.1 57 (for professional caregivers - not part of the evaluation)
Demi Tao 2.1 58
59 * (((
60 In the section “My Health”, add a medicine reminder to take the medicine **Donepezil**, 1 time per day at 9 PM before going to bed.
61 )))
62 * (((
63 Check medicines that have been added.
64 )))
65 * (((
66 Delete medicines that have been added.
67 )))
68
Ruud de Jong 1.1 69 == 2.4 Measures ==
70
Karthik Prakash 10.1 71 Two quantitative measures were employed in the user evaluation. The first measure aimed to test attributes including accessibility, trustworthiness, and comprehensibility. The second measure used was the System Usability Scale (SUS), which is a widely-used scale for evaluating the usability of the software.
Ruud de Jong 1.1 72
Karthik Prakash 11.1 73 In addition to the quantitative measures, a structured interview with open-ended questions was conducted with randomly selected participants. The aim of this interview was to gain a deeper understanding of participants' experiences with the robot, including any concerns they may have regarding the potential use of the system and its functions in a real-life setting.
Demi Tao 4.1 74
Demi Tao 8.1 75 By using both quantitative and qualitative measures, the user evaluation can provide a more comprehensive understanding of participants' experiences and perceptions of the system. This approach allows for a more nuanced analysis of the data and can provide valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the system, as well as areas for improvement.
Demi Tao 4.1 76
Ruud de Jong 1.1 77 == 2.5 Procedure ==
78
Demi Tao 2.1 79 The procedure was conducted as follows:
80
81 1. Welcome participants and give an introduction.
82 1. Get them to sign a consent form.
Demi Tao 8.1 83 1. Prepare them to pretend to be a person with dementia.
Demi Tao 2.1 84 1. Have interaction with the robot and complete the tasks.
85 1. Complete a questionnaire.
Demi Tao 8.1 86 1. Have a short interview with randomly selected participants.
Demi Tao 2.1 87
Ruud de Jong 1.1 88 == 2.6 Material ==
89
Arber Demi 2.2 90 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.
Demi Tao 9.1 91 1. [[Pepper robot>>doc:Main.c\. Technology.Humanoid Robot.WebHome]].
92 1. [[Questionnaire>>doc:Main.b\. Human Factors.Measuring Instruments.Questionnaire\: SUS.WebHome]]. Validated questions to test the functionality and usability.
Ruud de Jong 1.1 93
94 = 3. Results =
95
Demi Tao 17.1 96 === (% style="color:inherit; font-family:inherit" %)Results of the survey:(%%) ===
Karthik Prakash 14.1 97
Demi Tao 17.1 98 [[image:attach:chart.png||alt="Survey Results"]]
99
100 |(% style="width:215px" %)**Attributes**|(% style="width:211px" %)**Mean (control group)**|(% style="width:229px" %)**Mean (Experimental group)**|(% style="width:197px" %)**P-value**
101 |(% style="width:215px" %)Accessibility|(% style="width:211px" %)2,33|(% style="width:229px" %)3,25  |(% style="width:197px" %)0,0644
102 |(% style="width:215px" %)Trustability|(% style="width:211px" %)3,83|(% style="width:229px" %)4,125|(% style="width:197px" %)0,3165
103 |(% style="width:215px" %)Perceivability|(% style="width:211px" %)3,33|(% style="width:229px" %)3,5|(% style="width:197px" %)0,4112
104 |(% style="width:215px" %)Understandability|(% style="width:211px" %)3,33|(% style="width:229px" %)4,25|(% style="width:197px" %)0,1151
105 |(% style="width:215px" %)Empowerment|(% style="width:211px" %)3,33|(% style="width:229px" %)4|(% style="width:197px" %)0,0895
106 |(% style="width:215px" %)Usability|(% style="width:211px" %)54,16666667|(% style="width:229px" %)71,875|(% style="width:197px" %)0,0903
107
Karthik Prakash 21.1 108 === Observation: (Total percentage sums up to 100) ===
Demi Tao 17.1 109
Valentijn  van de Beek 15.1 110 |=(% style="width: 199px;" %)Tasks|=(% style="width: 147px;" %)Succeeded by Themselves|=(% style="width: 146px;" %)Succeeded with Some Guidance|=(% style="width: 185px;" %)Succeeded with Detailed Explicit Instructions|=(% style="width: 175px;" %)Average Time to Complete Task (s)
Demi Tao 17.1 111 |(% style="width:199px" %)Add a reminder|(% style="width:147px" %)14.29%|(% style="width:146px" %)28.57%|(% style="width:185px" %)57.14%|(% style="width:175px" %)97
Karthik Prakash 20.1 112 |(% style="width:199px" %)Check weekly remainders on the Calendar page|(% style="width:147px" %)100%|(% style="width:146px" %)NA|(% style="width:185px" %)NA|(% style="width:175px" %)36
Demi Tao 17.1 113 |(% style="width:199px" %)Create a personal profile|(% style="width:147px" %)7.14%|(% style="width:146px" %)50%|(% style="width:185px" %)42.86%|(% style="width:175px" %)69
Karthik Prakash 19.1 114 |(% style="width:199px" %)Verify current profiles|(% style="width:147px" %)85.71%|(% style="width:146px" %)14.29%|(% style="width:185px" %)NA|(% style="width:175px" %)32
Demi Tao 17.1 115 |(% style="width:199px" %)Play memory game|(% style="width:147px" %)0%|(% style="width:146px" %)42.86%|(% style="width:185px" %)57.14%|(% style="width:175px" %)208
Ruud de Jong 1.1 116
Demi Tao 16.1 117 |(% style="width:330px" %)**Tasks**|(% style="width:523px" %)**Parts where people struggled**
118 |(% style="width:330px" %)Add a reminder|(% style="width:523px" %)(((
119 * Don't know where to start
120 * No immediate audio feedback indicating success
121 )))
122 |(% style="width:330px" %)Create a personal profile|(% style="width:523px" %)(((
123 * It's hard to type with taped fingers
124 )))
125 |(% style="width:330px" %)Play memory game|(% style="width:523px" %)(((
Demi Tao 17.1 126 * Have no idea how to play the game, sometimes even after listening to the explicit instructions
Demi Tao 16.1 127 * There are too many words in the text
128 * The beta version has no right or wrong prompts, different from the instructions, making people confused
129 )))
Demi Tao 7.1 130
Ruud de Jong 1.1 131 = 4. Discussion =
132
Karthik Prakash 12.1 133 === Limitations: ===
Ruud de Jong 1.1 134
Valentijn  van de Beek 15.1 135 We ran into some problems while creating the application and performing the experiment:
Karthik Prakash 11.1 136
137 ==== Implementation: ====
138
139 * We could not adapt the robot to the PwD due to time constraints. This means that we did not take into account the severity of the PwD's visual, acoustic and kinesthetic limitations while setting up Pepper.
140 * We could not test the full capabilities of the robot due to privacy constraints. Since we fabricated the information about relatives to protect the privacy of participants, we were not able to perform the scenarios in a realistic manner.
141 * Since the version of the Google Chrome browser on the Pepper tablet was outdated, we were not able to load our Flutter application onto it and simulate actual scenarios.
Demi Tao 17.1 142 * Participants were from a wide variety of different backgrounds and mother tongues, it was therefore not possible to adjust Pepper to the specific culture of the participant.
Karthik Prakash 11.1 143
144 ==== Evaluation: ====
145
Karthik Prakash 12.1 146 * It is important to note that the participants who took part in our experiment were not affected by dementia.
Karthik Prakash 11.1 147 * The experiment was not conducted in a real-world setting.
148 * We were not able to test the improvement in memory recall since it involves sustained interactions with a particular user over time and our experiment involved brief, one-time interactions.
149
Karthik Prakash 13.1 150 === Future Improvements: ===
Karthik Prakash 11.1 151
Karthik Prakash 13.1 152 * We can make our system more realistic/adapted to PwD by incorporating human-like responses, gestures and movements to Pepper.
Karthik Prakash 14.1 153 * We can make our system fully gesture/voice controlled to enable the PwD to (% style="color:#000000; font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:400; text-decoration:none; white-space:pre-wrap" %)use the system without assistance from a caregiver, increasing their autonomy.
154 * (% style="color:#000000; font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:400; text-decoration:none; white-space:pre-wrap" %)We can incorporate privacy protocols like voice authentication and gaze detection to ensure that all personal information about the PwD, relatives and caregivers are kept safe and confidential.
Karthik Prakash 11.1 155
Ruud de Jong 1.1 156 = 5. Conclusions =
Karthik Prakash 13.1 157
158 After performing the experiment and running various statistical tests on the results obtained, we have made the following conclusions that hopefully answer some of our research questions:
159
Karthik Prakash 14.1 160 1. We believe that an information support application **DOES IMPROVE** a PwD's well-being, since it can (% style="color:#000000; font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:400; text-decoration:none; white-space:pre-wrap" %)provide them with access to important information and support, improving their overall quality of life.
161 1. We believe that a robot assistant **DOES IMPROVE** the experience of a PwD using it. The robot(% style="color:#000000; font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:400; text-decoration:none; white-space:pre-wrap" %) can provide companionship and assistance, making them feel independent and less isolated.
Karthik Prakash 13.1 162
Karthik Prakash 14.1 163 (% style="color:#000000; font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:400; text-decoration:none; white-space:pre-wrap" %)While our experiment had its limitations, we believe that it provides a foundation for future research in developing personalized memory robots for people with dementia. We also believe that our research is applicable to mobile agents which increases the accessibility of the solution.
Karthik Prakash 13.1 164
165