Skip to Content

Changes for page 3. Evaluation Methods

Last modified by William OGrady on 2024/04/08 22:22
From version 44.1
edited by William OGrady
on 2024/04/04 14:50
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 46.1
edited by William OGrady
on 2024/04/06 11:27
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -4,17 +4,17 @@
4 4  
5 5  ==== ====
6 6  
7 -== //**Study Design Variables**// ==
7 +== Study Design Variables ==
8 8  
9 9  The study will hypothesize on the following variables with regards to the system:
10 10  
11 11  
12 12  1. **Relatedness. **Does the design positively affect the PwD's //affective //state?
13 -11. **Affect**. How do participants feel about using the robot in this state?
14 -11. **Attitude towards Technology**. How do people think about using technology? Are they biased towards the robot before the study?
13 +11. **Affect**. How do participants feel about using the NAO in this state?
14 +11. **Attitude towards Technology**. How do people think about using technology? Are they biased towards the NAO before the study?
15 15  1. **Competence. **Is the design //competent//; is the design capable enough for the PwD to rely on it?
16 16  11. **Memory self-efficacy **(pre-study) How good are participants at remembering information?
17 -11. **Memory recall **(post-study) Can the participant accurately retrieve information through the robot?
17 +11. **Memory recall **(post-study) Can the participant accurately retrieve information through the NAO?
18 18  
19 19  For a sample size as small as 20 participants, it is most adequate to apply a within-subjects design (they require fewer participants) [1]. That means there is an approach where every PwD is experiencing all of the conditions examined. A within-subjects design might be prone to confounds such as pre-existing notions in the environment. That is why the attitude towards robots and the pre-study sense of affect and autonomy should be examined and evaluated as such.
20 20  
... ... @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
21 21  [[image:3\. Evaluation.b\. Test.WebHome@Socio-Cognitive Engineering - Frame 1.jpg]]
22 22  
23 23  
24 -== //**Surveys**// ==
24 +== Surveys ==
25 25  
26 26  Affect will be measured by the Self-Assessment Manikin [2] that takes less than a minute. It will be used for both pre-experiment and post-experiment evaluation.
27 27  
... ... @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
30 30  A well-suited tool for Memory self-efficacy is the mini-mental state examination [3]. We adopt it to fit to the ecological validity and domain of interest in our study.
31 31  
32 32  
33 -== //**References**// ==
33 +== References ==
34 34  
35 35  [1] Bethel, C.L., Henkel, Z., Baugus, K. (2020). Conducting Studies in Human-Robot Interaction. In: Jost, C., //et al.// Human-Robot Interaction. Springer Series on Bio- and Neurosystems, vol 12. Springer, Cham. [[https:~~/~~/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42307-0_4>>https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42307-0_4]]
36 36