Skip to Content

Changes for page b. Test

Last modified by Demi Breen on 2023/04/09 15:10
From version 41.1
edited by Maya Elasmar
on 2023/04/03 13:27
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 43.1
edited by Hugo van Dijk
on 2023/04/03 17:52
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -XWiki.MayaElasmar
1 +XWiki.hjpvandijk
Content
... ... @@ -116,11 +116,11 @@
116 116  
117 117  === Noteworthy answers ===
118 118  
119 -On average, participants only rejected the robot's persuasion attempts 0.5 times. The participants rated the robot a 2/5 in terms of being scary. They gave a 4/5 for it making life more interesting and it being good to make use of the robot. Questions related to the participant's enjoyment and fascination with the system and the robot were met with ratings between 3.8 and 4.1. The question "I think the staff would like me using the robot" was rated a 4/5 on average. Finally, to the question of whether they would not have gone for a walk if the robot didn't ask them to, the average answer was 3.8/5. All these answers had a standard deviation of less than 1.
119 +On average, participants only rejected the robot's persuasion attempts 0.5 times. The participants rated the robot a 2/5 in terms of being scary. They gave a 4/5 for it making life more interesting and it being good to make use of the robot. Questions related to the participant's enjoyment and fascination with the system and the robot were met with ratings between 3.8 and 4.1. The question "I think the staff would like me using the robot" was rated a 4/5 on average. A 2.3/5 was given to the statement "The robot insisted too much to go on a walk". Finally, to the question of whether they would not have gone for a walk if the robot didn't ask them to, the average answer was 3.8/5. All these answers had a standard deviation of less than 1.
120 120  
121 121  === ANOVA ===
122 122  
123 -Firstly, the Jarque-Bera test [2] was used to check for normality. When the answers to a question weren't normally distributed, the Mann-Whitney U-Test [3] was used. For normally distributed answers, the T-Test [4] was used. These tests used the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the two groups. When the calculated probability value (p-value) is less than 0.05, we can reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is a significant difference between the two groups for the answers to that question.
123 +Firstly, the Jarque-Bera test [3] was used to check for normality. When the answers to a question weren't normally distributed, the Mann-Whitney U-Test [4] was used. For normally distributed answers, the T-Test [5] was used. These tests used the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the two groups. When the calculated probability value (p-value) is less than 0.05, we can reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is a significant difference between the two groups for the answers to that question.
124 124  
125 125  Even though the average rejections were higher for emotion-based (0,875) than for goal-based(0,125). This difference was not significant.
126 126