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, Operational Demands -- Situated Activities
Operational Demands -- Problem Scenario
Meets the criterion:
Compelling scenario (employee with Early-onset Dementia) articulates breakdowns (conversation tracking, protocol recall, stress) and limits of static tools.
(Potential) Improvements:
Describe actions and consequences relevant to the problem in the existing scenario in more detail (e.g., in a narrative form before design intervention).
Focus on outlining the problem (i.e., do not refer to a potential solution yet).
Operational Demands -- Situated Activities
Meets the criterion:
Lists a typical customer‑service workflow with clear task steps and escalation.
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 stakeholder groups are well covered (employee, customer, robot; team lead, HR, developers, family).
Primary persona (employee) is detailed in the scenario with values (dignity, independence, non‑surveillance support).
(Potential) Improvements:
Add rich persona elements for the customer and team lead
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:
Provides a task sequence for customer service interactions that can anchor later use cases.
(Potential) Improvements:
Describe relevant existing (organizational, environmental, social?) constraints and capabilities of actors present in the existing scenario in greater detail.
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, Human Factors -- Evaluation Methods
Human Factors -- Situated Cognition
Meets the criterion:
Thorough, context‑sensitive HF rationale connects identity, purpose, stress regulation, and situated support at work.
(Potential) Improvements:
Summarise key constructs (attention, working memory, stress) with operational definitions that can be used for the specification of relevant effects later.
Human Factors -- Evaluation Methods
Meets the criterion:
Describes outcome metrics aligned with the task steps and intended effects.
(Potential) Improvements:
Description is tied to a specific use case before that is defined. Focus here instead on describing how the key constructions that you have identified in the Situated Cognition are generally measured and evaluating these alternative options. Selection for specific measures can then be made in the evaluation description.
5. Technology Rationale: “Is the envisioned Technology described with a clear rationale for its selection, including an analysis of its potential benefits and drawbacks?”
Applies to: Technology -- AI and ICT, Technology -- Social Robot
Technology -- AI and ICT
Meets the criterion:
Current prototype uses scripted prompts; future extension to LLMs for adaptive support is reasoned.
(Potential) Improvements:
Outline potential alternatives and give selection rationale tied to constraints and tasks; document limitations (cost, maintenance, mobility).
Technology -- Social Robot
Meets the criterion:
Pepper selected with clear task‑fit (multimodal prompts, touchscreen, gesture) and a practical integration path.
(Potential) Improvements:
Provide trade‑offs vs. non‑embodied agents or desktop companions; document safety/usability concerns in customer‑facing spaces.
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:
Operational needs (guided clarification, eligibility checks) are linked to HF premises (reduce omissions, support memory) and enabling tech (scripted prompts → LLM).
(Potential) Improvements:
More explicitly link Operational Demands and Human Factor knowledge to the potential of the surveyed Technology.
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, Situated Activities
Operational Demands – Problem Scenario
Meets the criterion:
Compelling scenario (employee with EoD) articulates breakdowns (conversation tracking, protocol recall, stress) and limits of static tools.
(Potential) Improvements:
No notes.
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/indirect stakeholders covered (employee, customer, robot; team lead, HR, developers, family); employee persona detailed with values.
(Potential) Improvements:
Persona details of stakeholders could be more detailed (e.g., demographics, values, …)
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:
Typical customer-service workflow provided with task steps and escalation.
(Potential) Improvements:
Describe relevant existing (organizational, environmental, social?) setting, constraints, and capabilities of actors present in the existing scenario in greater detail.
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:
Thorough HF rationale connects identity, purpose, stress regulation, and situated work support.
(Potential) Improvements:
Hypotheses and specific connection to the evaluated claim are better factored out of the Evaluation part of the report. This part is primarily for more general discussion and reflection on evaluation methods suitable for the concepts discussed in Operational Demands and Situated Cognition.
Reflect on the discussed evaluation methods (e.g., suitability, pros/cons)
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:
Scripted prompts with path to LLMs; Pepper selected for multimodal prompts, touchscreen, and gestures.
(Potential) Improvements:
Outline potential alternatives and give selection rationale tied to constraints and tasks; document limitations (cost, maintenance, mobility).
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:
Operational needs (guided clarification, eligibility checks) linked to HF premises and enabling tech.
(Potential) Improvements:
Expand on the basic integration logic you have provided by more explicitly linking Operational Demands and Human Factor knowledge to the potential of the surveyed Technology.
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, Operational Demands -- 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, Human Factors -- Evaluation Methods
5. Technology Rationale: “Is the envisioned Technology described with a clear rationale for its selection, including an analysis of its potential benefits and drawbacks?”
Applies to: Technology -- AI and ICT, Technology -- 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, Situated Activities
Operational Demands – Problem Scenario
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: