1. Problem Definition — “Is the Problem clearly defined and illustrated with a compelling Problem Scenario that involves specific Stakeholders and their current Activities?”
Applies to: Operational Demands → Problem Scenario, Stakeholders, Situated Activities
Operational Demands — Problem Scenario
Meets the criterion:
Presents a concrete narrative (resident, caregiver, family) foregrounding loneliness, planning difficulty, and coordination constraints in a dementia care center.
Highlights practical limitations (limited caregiver time; need for meaningful activities).
(Potential) Improvements:
Add explicit operational constraints (e.g. staffing ratios, time windows, privacy rules) and success/failure conditions.
Clarify current activity planning cadence and breakdowns (missed prompts, overlapping schedules)
Operational Demands — Situated Activities
Meets the criterion:
Section titles indicate intent to cover day‑to‑day activity context.
(Potential) Improvements:
Provide granular current workflows and sequences before technology intervention.
Operational Demands — Stakeholders
Meets the criterion:
Identifies direct and indirect stakeholders with concise goal‑oriented statements.
(Potential) Improvements:
Expand to rich personas (background, routines, capabilities/limitations, values, relationships, digital literacy, risk sensitivities). That is, make separate persona tables or pages for the key direct stakeholders with the concerning links (in Specification — a2 Personas).
Include additional stakeholders with meaningful influence and articulate their values and success metrics.
2. Stakeholder Analysis — “Are Stakeholders well-defined using rich Personas? Does the documentation thoroughly analyze their needs, motivations, and core Values?”
Applies to: Operational Demands → Stakeholders
Operational Demands — Stakeholders
Meets the criterion:
Lists key stakeholder groups and initial need/value statements.
Identifies direct and indirect stakeholders with concise goal‑oriented statements.
(Potential) Improvements:
Include additional stakeholders with meaningful influence and articulate their values and success metrics.
Include links of stakeholders to the personas in Specification — a2 Personas (make separate persona tables or pages for the key direct stakeholders there).
3. Depth of Contextual Analysis — “Does the documentation provide a deep and granular analysis of user Activities and Tasks, effectively explaining how they are shaped by the rich real‑world Context?”
Applies to: Operational Demands → Situated Activities
Operational Demands — Situated Activities
Meets the criterion:
Contextual elements and pain points are implied in the scenario.
(Potential) Improvements:
Provide task decompositions with preconditions, breakdown points, handoffs, artefacts, and constraints.
4. Human Factors Grounding — “Does the documentation ground the design in established scientific Knowledge by articulating relevant Human Factors concepts?”
Applies to: Human Factors → Situated Cognition, Evaluation Methods
Human Factors — Situated Cognition
Meets the criterion:
Identifies meaningful activity, social connectedness, trust, memory/identity, and emotion/stress with design implications.
(Potential) Improvements:
Link each aspect to candidate measures and operationalization strategies.
Human Factors — Evaluation Methods
Meets the criterion:
Placeholder indicates intent to compile methods.
(Potential) Improvements:
Populate with concrete methods aligned to the Human Factors aspects (observational coding, mood scales, caregiver workload).
5. Technology Rationale — “Is the envisioned Technology (e.g., AI and ICT, Social Robot) described with a clear rationale for its selection, including an analysis of its potential benefits and drawbacks?”
Applies to: Technology → AI and ICT, Social Robot
Technology — AI and ICT
Meets the criterion:
Describes how personalisation, sentiment analysis, and secure ICT could support coordination; notes ethics and data protection.
(Potential) Improvements:
Provide explicit trade‑offs and mitigation strategies (guardrails, consent, data minimisation).
Technology — Social Robot
Meets the criterion:
Outlines a compact humanoid robot with mobility and affective sensing aimed at reducing loneliness and assisting caregivers.
(Potential) Improvements:
Justify embodiment choice against task requirements and document limitations with mitigations.
6. Component Integration — “How well are the Operational Demands, Human Factors, and Technology integrated to form a coherent and justified Foundation for the project?”
Applies to: Operational Demands, Human Factors, Technology
Meets the criterion:
Conceptual alignment is apparent across demands, HF needs, and enabling technologies.
(Potential) Improvements:
More explicitly link operational demands to HF concepts and technologies.
1. Problem Definition: "Is the Problem clearly defined and illustrated with a compelling Problem Scenario that involves specific Stakeholders and their current Activities?"
Applies to: Operational Demands – Problem Scenario, Stakeholders, Situated Activities
Operational Demands – Problem Scenario / Situated Activities
Includes explicit operational constraints (e.g., staffing ratios, activity hours, privacy policy) and success/failure conditions.
(Potential) Improvements:
Potentially provide a storyboard for visual illustration of the problem scenario.
2. Stakeholder Analysis: "Are Stakeholders well-defined using rich Personas? Does the documentation thoroughly analyze their needs, motivations, and core Values?"
Applies to: Operational Demands – Stakeholders
Operational Demands – Stakeholders
Meets the criterion:
Direct and indirect stakeholders listed with goals/values; person-like profiles (Rebecca, John, Anna).
Includes success indicators for primary personas.
(Potential) Improvements:
No notes.
3. Depth of Contextual Analysis: "Does the documentation provide a deep and granular analysis of user Activities and Tasks, effectively explaining how the rich real-world Context shapes them?"
Applies to: Operational Demands – Situated Activities
Provides granular task analyses for resident, caregiver, and family with artefacts, preconditions, handoffs, and breakdowns.
Contextual constraints and exception cases are articulated.
(Potential) Improvements:
Add a more detailed description of the environment in which the interaction takes place
4. Human Factors Grounding: "Does the documentation ground the design in established scientific Knowledge by articulating relevant Human Factors concepts?"
Applies to: Human Factors – Situated Cognition, Evaluation Methods
Human Factors – Situated Cognition
Meets the criterion:
HF constructs (meaningful activity, social connectedness, trust, memory/identity, emotion & stress) linked to observable indicators.
Person-centred care literature is used to ground design choices.
(Potential) Improvements:
Could elaborate on the meaning of the columns in Situated Cognition.
5. Technology Rationale: "Is the envisioned Technology (e.g., AI and ICT, Social Robot) described with a clear rationale for its selection, including an analysis of its potential benefits and drawbacks?"
Applies to: Technology – AI and ICT, Social Robot
Technology – AI and ICT / Social Robot
Meets the criterion:
Balanced rationale for selecting Pepper; lists capabilities, limitations, and mitigations tied to context.
AI/ICT section includes personalisation and governance guardrails (consent, privacy-by-design, explainability).
(Potential) Improvements:
More clearly highlight the relationship between the concepts in the first part of AI and ICT (e.g. “Personalized Interaction and Narrative Support”) to the table outlining “Trade-offs and Ethical Considerations”.
6. Component Integration: "How well are the Operational Demands, Human Factors, and Technology integrated to form a coherent and justified Foundation for the project?"
Applies to: Operational Demands, Human Factors, Technology
Foundation – Component Integration
Meets the criterion:
Cross-references connect context problems, HF measures, and technology choice/mitigations.
Planned measures align with success conditions (attendance, workload, wellbeing).
Project home
1. Problem Definition — “Is the Problem clearly defined and illustrated with a compelling Problem Scenario that involves specific Stakeholders and their current Activities?”
Applies to: Operational Demands → Problem Scenario, Stakeholders, Situated Activities
2. Stakeholder Analysis — “Are Stakeholders well-defined using rich Personas? Does the documentation thoroughly analyze their needs, motivations, and core Values?”
Applies to: Operational Demands → Stakeholders
3. Depth of Contextual Analysis — “Does the documentation provide a deep and granular analysis of user Activities and Tasks, effectively explaining how they are shaped by the rich real‑world Context?”
Applies to: Operational Demands → Situated Activities
4. Human Factors Grounding — “Does the documentation ground the design in established scientific Knowledge by articulating relevant Human Factors concepts?”
Applies to: Human Factors → Situated Cognition, Evaluation Methods
5. Technology Rationale — “Is the envisioned Technology (e.g., AI and ICT, Social Robot) described with a clear rationale for its selection, including an analysis of its potential benefits and drawbacks?”
Applies to: Technology → AI and ICT, Social Robot
6. Component Integration — “How well are the Operational Demands, Human Factors, and Technology integrated to form a coherent and justified Foundation for the project?”
Applies to: Operational Demands, Human Factors, Technology
Feedback on Revised Draft
1. Problem Definition: "Is the Problem clearly defined and illustrated with a compelling Problem Scenario that involves specific Stakeholders and their current Activities?"
Applies to: Operational Demands – Problem Scenario, Stakeholders, Situated Activities
Operational Demands – Problem Scenario / Situated Activities
Meets the criterion:
(Potential) Improvements:
2. Stakeholder Analysis: "Are Stakeholders well-defined using rich Personas? Does the documentation thoroughly analyze their needs, motivations, and core Values?"
Applies to: Operational Demands – Stakeholders
Operational Demands – Stakeholders
Meets the criterion:
(Potential) Improvements:
3. Depth of Contextual Analysis: "Does the documentation provide a deep and granular analysis of user Activities and Tasks, effectively explaining how the rich real-world Context shapes them?"
Applies to: Operational Demands – Situated Activities
Operational Demands – Situated Activities / Task Decompositions
Meets the criterion:
(Potential) Improvements:
4. Human Factors Grounding: "Does the documentation ground the design in established scientific Knowledge by articulating relevant Human Factors concepts?"
Applies to: Human Factors – Situated Cognition, Evaluation Methods
Human Factors – Situated Cognition
Meets the criterion:
(Potential) Improvements:
5. Technology Rationale: "Is the envisioned Technology (e.g., AI and ICT, Social Robot) described with a clear rationale for its selection, including an analysis of its potential benefits and drawbacks?"
Applies to: Technology – AI and ICT, Social Robot
Technology – AI and ICT / Social Robot
Meets the criterion:
(Potential) Improvements:
6. Component Integration: "How well are the Operational Demands, Human Factors, and Technology integrated to form a coherent and justified Foundation for the project?"
Applies to: Operational Demands, Human Factors, Technology
Foundation – Component Integration
Meets the criterion:
(Potential) Improvements: