Changes for page b. Test

Summary

• Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Author

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-XWiki.MayaElasmar
	1	+XWiki.Demibreen1000

Content

...	...	@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
28	28
29	29	**Methodological set-up:**
30	30
31		-Pepper will be turned on and will start a conversation with the participant. It will ask the participant to go on a walk and based on the answer Pepper will go on the walk immediately or will try to motivate the PwD to go on a walk with him. During the walk, Pepper will ask the participant questions to keep the participant engaged and keep continuing on the walk. So for the experiment, a Pepper robot, the Choregraphe software and also freedom of movement are needed. The full step-by-step schedule of the experiment is given in the attachments for both the [[goal-based motivation>>attach:Ontology & robot design - goal-based.pdf]] and the [[emotion-based motivation>>attach:Ontology & robot design - emotion-based.pdf]].
	31	+Pepper will be turned on and will start a conversation with the participant. It will ask the participant to go on a walk and based on the answer Pepper will go on the walk immediately or will try to motivate the PwD to go on a walk with him. During the walk, Pepper will ask the participant questions to keep the participant engaged and keep continuing on the walk. So for the experiment, a Pepper robot, the Choregraphe software and also freedom of movement are needed. The full step-by-step schedule of the experiment is given in the attachments for both the [[goal-based motivation>>attach:goal-based motivation.pdf]] and the [[emotion-based motivation>>attach:emotion-based motivation.pdf]].
32	32
33	33	**Conditions**:
34	34
...	...	@@ -79,12 +79,17 @@
79	79
80	80	== 2.5 Procedure ==
81	81
82		-The procedure is as follows: we want the to test the claims mentioned above in the introduction. Therefore we programmed two routes in Choreography: one for the emotion-based motivation test and one for the goal-based motivation. To focus on only these two types of motivations, everything else in the route was kept the same. This is also to make sure that nothing else besides the motivation influences the participant's opinion on taking the walk.
	82	+The claims that need to be tested are thus:
83	83
84		-For the exeperiment we wrote an [[orientation script>>doc:3\. Evaluation.Scenario description.WebHome]] for the participants to introduce them to our design and explain them what they should do and that they should step into the shoes of our persona Bob. Bob is a person with anger issues and dementia. However, the participants did not know whether they are tested with emotion-based or goal-based motivation walk. We also wrote a consent form to ask for their consent to take part in the experiment. One of the main points in the consent from is that they will be recorded. We wanted to record them to re-evaluate all the experiments and see if we missed something. This also helped us with the final results and the discussion. If the participant did not agree, then we of course did not record him/her.
	84	+- The effect of emotion-based motivation; The PwD can comprehend the emotion that is being conveyed and in that way is motivated to contribute to the activity of walking in the garden.
85	85
86		-The following happend during an experiment:
	86	+- The effect of goal-based motivation; The PwD can comprehend the goal and end-state of the promoted activity and in that way is motivated to contribute to the activity of walking in the garden
87	87
	88	+- Whether there is a noticeable difference between emotion-based and goal-based; The PwD can communicate how he/she feels and score the walk.
	89	+
	90	+
	91	+The robot and students need to perform the following tasks:
	92	+
88	88	~1. Pepper will be turned on and will scan/check his environment
89	89
90	90	2. Pepper will look for a face and will turn to the person that he sees
...	...	@@ -95,13 +95,13 @@
95	95
96	96	5. Pepper will start motivating based on the answer that the student gives:
97	97
98		- 5a. When the student says yes, Pepper will start walking with the student and during the walk will have some small talk
99		- 5b. When the student says no, Pepper will start the motivational part of the experiment. For the first experiment Pepper will use emotion-based  motivation and for the second experiment Pepper will use the goal-based motivation
100		- 5c. If the student then decides to say yes, then Pepper will start walking with the student and during the walk will have some small talk
	103	+ 5.1 When the student says yes, Pepper will start walking with the student and during the walk will have some small talk
	104	+5.2 When the student says no, Pepper will start the motivational part of the experiment. For the first experiment Pepper will use emotion-based motivation and for the second experiment Pepper will use the goal-based motivation
	105	+5.3 If the student then decides to say yes, then Pepper will start walking with the student and during the walk will have some small talk
	106	+6. After the walk/activity is finished Pepper will thank the student and will state again how important it is to stay active
101	101
102		-During the experiment, one of us wrote down observations of the experiment and another one recoreded the experiment if allowed. We had also prepared a questionnaire to measure our claims, which we talked about in details in the measures section. All the participants had to fill in these questionnaire after the experiment. We wanted to make sure that we had an equal amount of both types of tests to get an unbiased result. Hence, we finished the evaluation once we had a relatively good and equal amount of experiments.
	108	+7. Then the student is asked to answer some questions to evaluate the experience.
103	103
104		-
105	105	== 2.6 Material ==
106	106
107	107	The material needed for this experiment is of course the Pepper robot. We also need a laptop to run the robot.
...	...	@@ -135,9 +135,9 @@
135	135
136	136	As the robot's speech recognition could only understand single words due to its implementation, this resulted in numerous occasions where a participant was not understood and had to repeat themselves. It also occurred that the robot understood 'yes' when 'no' was said.
137	137
138		-In total during all of the evaluations performed, only one participant went into the Bob persona fully, which was described for the participant in the orientation script. He mentioned that the "no" he was giving during the test was more attention-seeking than a real no to the walk, which is a very useful observation.
	143	+- Mention something about only one participant going into Bob's character fully? And that he mentioned that the "no" he was giving was more attention-seeking than a real no.
139	139
140		-In a couple of the evaluations, it happened that the robot cut participants off mid-sentence once it had recognized a word that was spoken if they were speaking slower or elaborating on their answers. This is not ideal for a future and complete design and definitely would be something that needs to be worked on.
	145	+- Add that sometimes the robot cut participants off, if they were speaking slower or elaborating on their answer.
141	141
142	142
143	143
...	...	@@ -169,7 +169,6 @@
169	169	**ADD FUTURE WORK**
170	170
171	171
172		-
173	173	= 5. Conclusions =
174	174
175	175	Both systems were deemed enjoyable and fascinating, and little rejections were made to both types of persuasions. No significant difference was found in any of the measures between the two groups.