Changes for page 3. Evaluation Methods
Last modified by William OGrady on 2024/04/08 22:22
From version 7.1
edited by Jean-Paul Smit
on 2024/03/01 02:54
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
on 2024/03/01 02:50
Change comment:
There is no comment for this version
Summary
-
Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
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, which 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