Skip to Content

Changes for page 3. Evaluation Methods

Last modified by William OGrady on 2024/04/08 22:22
From version 49.1
edited by Diederik Heijbroek
on 2024/04/07 20:22
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 47.1
edited by William OGrady
on 2024/04/06 11:27
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -xwiki:XWiki.DiederikHeijbroek
1 +xwiki:XWiki.WilliamOGrady
Content
... ... @@ -1,5 +3,3 @@
1 -== Overview ==
2 -
3 3  To ground the design rationale in practice, the prototype of the NAO for the PwD will be evaluated in a formative evaluation with the PwD and their caregivers. The evaluation will investigate the process of how interaction with the NAO can alleviate potential symptoms caused by early-stage dementia in PwD.  Three methods of evaluation will be applied to have reliable and accurate results, as Bethel. et al (2020)[1] suggests.
4 4  
5 5  The study will focus on the prototype's potential effects, which are based on the desired value of autonomy as a part of self-direction. Before the study, possible confounding variables need to be examined such as the PwD's attitude towards robots and the** relatedness** and **competence**.
... ... @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
10 10  
11 11  The study will hypothesize on the following variables with regards to the system:
12 12  
11 +
13 13  1. **Relatedness. **Does the design positively affect the PwD's //affective //state?
14 14  11. **Affect**. How do participants feel about using the NAO in this state?
15 15  11. **Attitude towards Technology**. How do people think about using technology? Are they biased towards the NAO before the study?