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
Add current interactions or dialogues, baseline participation levels, and measurable entry/exit conditions for core activities.
Operational Demands — Situated Activities
Meets the criterion:
Detailed environments and activities (feeding, walking, playing) with materials and rationale.
(Potential) Improvements:
Add stepwise flows with preconditions, triggers, breakdowns (refusal, fatigue), and safety contingencies.
Operational Demands — Stakeholders
Meets the criterion:
Direct and indirect stakeholders with value statements (autonomy, emotional well‑being, workload relief, safety, trust).
(Potential) Improvements:
Expand into rich personas including constraints; define persona‑specific 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:
Direct and indirect stakeholders with value statements (autonomy, emotional well‑being, workload relief, safety, trust).
Augment with social network/context maps and explicit value trade‑offs (e.g., autonomy vs. safety).
Link to the key direct stakeholders to Specification — a2 Personas
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:
Rich contextualization of activities, materials, and environments; strong motivation linking to identity, memory, and emotional regulation.
(Potential) Improvements:
Provide formal task models and note environmental constraints (quiet hours, staff coverage).
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:
Coherent set of concepts (meaningful activities, emotional regulation, social connectedness, memory, interaction fluency) with design implications.
(Potential) Improvements:
For each concept, define candidate measures and data sources; specify how evidence will later support or refute related claims.
Human Factors — Evaluation Methods
Meets the criterion:
Proposes observational methods, simple mood scales, interviews, and activity logging aligned with activities.
(Potential) Improvements:
Add instruments, sampling plans, and reliability/validity notes; predefine thresholds for success.
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:
Back‑end for activity history/personalisation; dog‑like behavioural cues tailored to past experiences.
(Potential) Improvements:
Discuss privacy/consent for personal media; specify processing location and data retention.
Technology — Social Robot
Meets the criterion:
MiRo‑E features (touch sensors, expressive movements, mobility, connectivity) match planned activities.
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:
Needs (companionship, activity prompting) are linked to HF premises and MiRo‑E capabilities, with AI personalisation bridging context and behaviour.
(Potential) Improvements:
Make the key relations between operational demands → HF → enabling technology concrete
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:
Narrative (James) with entry/exit conditions; activities situated with environments, materials, and safety rationale.
(Potential) Improvements:
Apply the well-structured analysis framework in Situated Activities to the current state (i.e., before the robot is present). Some of the current content may be better suited to describing the Design Scenario (i.e., how the activities will be addressed once the robot is present).
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:
Rich personas for PwD, caregiver, and relative; indirect stakeholders noted.
(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
Overall content is good, but see suggestions above for restructuring content (i.e., remove content that is better placed in another part of the report and focus on the status quo).
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 mapped to candidate measures/data sources.
(Potential) Improvements:
Some motivation or reflection on the potential evaluation instruments would strengthen this aspect of the report.
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:
Back-end for activity history/personalisation; GDPR-aligned consent and data rights considered; MiRo‑E choice justified with risks and mitigations.
(Potential) Improvements:
Discussion of potential alternatives (with their pros/cons as part of motivating your choice) for AI and ICT, or Social Robot would further improve this aspect of the report.
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:
Consistent mapping from activities/values to robot behaviours and measures; safety/privacy considered alongside engagement.
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
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: