Skip to Content

Changes for page 3. Evaluation Methods

Last modified by William OGrady on 2024/04/08 22:22
From version 6.3
edited by Jean-Paul Smit
on 2024/03/01 02:54
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 6.1
edited by Jean-Paul Smit
on 2024/03/01 02:50
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -11,11 +11,9 @@
11 11  3. Is the design //dependable//; do PwD sense that they can rely on it?
12 12  
13 13  
14 -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 subject 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. Another confounder variable to look into is the study location and environment.
14 +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 subject 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.
15 15  
16 -The evaluation methods will be self-assessment and task performance.For the self-assessment methods, a tool can only be included in the study when it is validated.
17 17  
18 -
19 19  [[image:Socio-Cognitive Engineering - Frame 1.jpg]]
20 20  
21 21