Changes for page 1. Music and Cognition

Summary

• Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -1,46 +39,8 @@
1		-Paper 2:
2		-
3		-* . Additionally, Chang et al. [11] tested the Paro robot in a nursing home in an 8-weeks trial and observed an increased willingness amongst participants to interact with the robot.
4		-* Paro was evaluated more positively, whereas the Guide robot could be improved in terms of making it more simple and improving its ergonomics
5		-* Hebesberger et al. [16] investigated the use of a robot as a walking group as-
6		-sistant at a care site accompanying adults with advanced dementia. The robot
7		-offered visual and acoustic stimulation. The findings suggested that a robot has
8		-the potential to enhance motivation, group coherence, and also mood within the
9		-walking group
10		-* For exercise and reminiscence
11		-* Music bingo
12		-* Robot becomes point of discussion & conversation
13		-* Used NAO robot
14		-* One participant being negative towards the robot can influence the rest.
15		-* Caretaker stresses that caretaker interference is needed for PwD to keep interacting with robot.
16		-* Ppl had trouble following movemenents sometimes.
17		-* Remenicense exercise made PwD active.
18		-* One participant scared of robot when it talked after being quiet for some time.
19		-* Caretaker states robot's main purpose should be conversational interaction, not exercise.
20		-* Robot should have less monotonic voice.
21		-* Ppl remembered robot but not the music/singing/dancing.
22		-* Ppl respond more to music than engage in talking
23		-* Not clear if positive effect on people's state.
24		-* Potentially, inviting to dance better effect than structured exercise.
25		-* Positive effect on cognitive activity.
26		-* Robot itself not perse positive effect on social interaction, but music does.
27		-* Over course of sessions, ppl interacted less with robot and more with each other. If not like robot from start ~-~-> stopped with study. Other ppl displayed continuously high interest levels.
28		-
29		-Paper 1:
30		-
31		-People find it hard to interact with the tablet. Made design easier later on by having pictures. Process was about simplifying the interaction for the PwD. Reaction to music was very different between the PwD. Too loud is intimidating.Difficult interface makes it hard to connect with other PwD. Different types of music interesting for mother/daughter.
32		-
33		-
34		-So:
35		-
36		-We thought about including music in our system but because of our environment (outside), it might be distracting/annoying for other people in the area if music is played.  It could also be distracting for Maria/Bob if the task of walking/finding the route is difficult enough. In this context it is not too relevant to use music for reminiscence.
37		-
38		-
39	39	**Final text:**
40	40
41		-Using the Paro robot [1], [2] performed an 8-week trial in a nursing home. Here they observed that participants' motivation to interact with the robot increased over time. Participants were more positive about the Paro bot compared to the Guide robot. The Guide robot lacks simplicity and ergonomic usability. [3] evaluated a robot as an assistant to a walking group of people with advanced dementia. It stimulated the group both acoustically and visually. Results showed that the robot system was promising for improving motivation, group dynamics, and general mood.
	3	+Using the Paro robot [1], [2] performed an 8-week trial in a nursing home. Here they observed that participants' motivation to interact with the robot increased over time. Participants were more positive about the Paro bot compared to the Guide robot. The Guide robot lacks simplicity and ergonomic usability. D. Hebesberger et al. [3] evaluated a robot as an assistant to a walking group of people with advanced dementia. It stimulated the group both acoustically and visually. Results showed that the robot system was promising for improving motivation, group dynamics, and general mood.
42	42
43		-[4] used the Nao robot for exercise and reminiscence activities, like music bingo. They noted that the robot becomes a point of discussion and observation. During the interaction, they observed that if one participant is negative towards the robot, this can influence the rest of the group. The assisting caretaker also stressed that their interference is required to keep the participants interacting with the robot. For the physical exercise activities, the participants sometimes had difficulty following all movements. There was also an occasion where a participant got scared of the robot when it talked suddenly after being quiet for a while.
	5	+Mark A. Neerincx et al. [4] used the Nao robot for exercise and reminiscence activities, like music bingo. They noted that the robot becomes a point of discussion and observation. During the interaction, they observed that if one participant is negative towards the robot, this can influence the rest of the group. The assisting caretaker also stressed that their interference is required to keep the participants interacting with the robot. For the physical exercise activities, the participants sometimes had difficulty following all movements. There was also an occasion where a participant got scared of the robot when it talked suddenly after being quiet for a while.
44	44
45	45	According to the caretaker, the robot's main purpose should be stimulating conversational interaction, and not exercise. And that it should have a less monotonic voice, to make it easier for PwD to understand it.
46	46
...	...	@@ -56,17 +56,14 @@
56	56	sory group therapy for older adults with dementia”. In: 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International
57	57	Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE. 2013, pp. 101–102.
58	58
59		-
60	60	[3] Denise Hebesberger et al. “Lessons learned from the deployment of a long-term autonomous
61	61	robot as companion in physical therapy for older adults with dementia a mixed methods
62	62	study”. In: 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
63	63	(HRI) (2016). doi: 10.1109/hri.2016.7451730.
64	64
65		-
66	66	[4] Mark A. Neerincx et al. “Designing a personal music assistant that enhances the social,
67	67	cognitive, and affective experiences of people with dementia”. In: (), pp. 727–737.
68	68
69		-
70	70	[5] Marieke M.M. Peeters, Maaike Harbers, and Mark A. Neerincx. “Designing a personal mu-
71	71	sic assistant that enhances the social, cognitive, and affective experiences of people with
72	72	dementia”. In: Computers in Human Behavior 63 (2016), pp. 727–737. doi: 10.1016/j.