Changes for page b. Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -1,8 +1,12 @@
1	1	=== 1. Introduction ===
2	2
3		-The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the Nao robot in aiding memory retrieval through the use of a between-subjects design with a test group and a control group. We will simulate conditions of early-stage dementia in student participants to test whether interactions with Nao enhance the retrieval of memories fabricated created by us, mimicking lost memories typical of individuals with dementia.
	3	+This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the Nao robot in aiding memory retrieval through the use of a between-subjects design with a test group and a control group. We will simulate conditions of early-stage dementia in student participants to test whether interactions with Nao enhance the retrieval of memories fabricated created by us, mimicking lost memories typical of individuals with dementia.
4	4
	5	+Recall the image from the [[3. Evaluation Methods>>Main.b\. Human Factors.Measuring Instruments.WebHome]] in the [[1. Foundation>>Main.WebHome]] as in the figure below. The first two concepts, that of Autonomy and Relatedness and the memory self-efficacy, will be tested by using validated surveys. The memory recall will be tested by a custom survey that was catered to be used with the robot in the domain of interest, that is of using the NAO as an encyclopedia for recalling familiar people.
5	5
	7	+[[image:Main.b\. Human Factors.Measuring Instruments.WebHome@Socio-Cognitive Engineering - Frame 1(4).jpg||height="421" width="735"]]
	8	+
	9	+
6	6	=== 2. Method ===
7	7
8	8	==== 2.1 Participants ====
...	...	@@ -34,12 +34,12 @@
34	34	1. **Recruitment and Consent**: Recruit a diverse group of student volunteers, ensuring informed consent for participation.
35	35	1. **Training**: Brief participants on their roles and the concept of simulated memory loss without revealing specific details of the fabricated memories.
36	36
37		-//**Phase 2: Baseline Assessment (Optional)**//
	41	+//**Phase 2: Baseline Assessment**//
38	38
39	39	1. **Pre-test**: Optionally, assess the students’ ability to recall general information unrelated to the fabricated memories to establish a baseline.
40	40	1. **Documentation**: Record responses to analyze as a baseline for later comparison.
41	41
42		-//**Phase 3: Memory Retrieval Test**//
	46	+//**Phase 3: Memory Recall**//
43	43
44	44	1. **Introduction**: Introduce participants in the test group to the NAO robot, explaining its purpose, and provide the control group with their first text-based memory prompt.
45	45	1. **Simulation**: Conduct sessions where the test group interacts with Nao aiming to recall a set of fabricated memories.
...	...	@@ -60,9 +60,20 @@
60	60	1. **Staff and Observer Insights**: Analyze observations from staff and observers for additional perspectives on the effectiveness and emotional impact of the interactions.
61	61	1. **Improvement Strategies**: Based on the feedback and results, develop a plan to enhance the memory retrieval capabilities of the Nao robot and the overall test design.
62	62
	67	+=== 3. Results ===
63	63
64		-=== Ethical Considerations ===
65	65
	70	+=== 4. Discussion ===
	71	+
	72	+//Ambiguities in the evaluation briefing has led to several aspects in the results that might misrepresent the participants' gathered knowledge. Points were awarded to the participant for certain key descriptors, each family member's role, occupation, likes, dislikes and so on. Of course, this wasn't known to the participant, so they might have omitted descriptors they deemed less important or trivial and therefore scored worse, even though they'd heard and remembered them.//
	73	+
	74	+//The choice to create a sprawling, multi-faceted database also had the side-effect of participants finding out a lot of information that was not rewarded by the grading system in any way. For example, the user can ask the robot to elaborate about certain memories or character traits of family members. There are also people in the database that act as ancillary characters and to create a sense of realism to the database, but participants can likely get stuck on learning about them as there is no implied hiearchy of importance to the participant. //
	75	+
	76	+
	77	+=== 5. Conclusions ===
	78	+
	79	+== //**Ethical Considerations**// ==
	80	+
66	66	We commit to high ethical standards, respecting the sensitive nature of simulating dementia conditions, and ensuring the well-being and dignity of all participants throughout the study. To ensure this we present a form containing the ethical considerations to each participant. **TODO: put in link to ethics form?**
67	67
68	68