TABLE 5.
The table shows the results of the robot rating for both robots in comparison between the condition groups for each interaction (see also section “Robot Rating: Robots were evaluated different in condition groups”).
|
Pepper |
Panda |
||||||||
| Time point | Factors | Upper bound | Lower bound | Effect size | p-value | Upper bound | Lower bound | Effect size | p-value |
| First interaction | Easy to use | –3.03 | –0.74 | 0.703 | 0.003 | –2.48 | –0.31 | 0.712 | 0.018 |
| Correction of errors | –3.49 | –0.95 | 0.726 | 0.002 | |||||
| Easy to brief | –2.86 | –0.36 | 0.622 | 0.016 | |||||
| Good task | –2.87 | –0.13 | 0.636 | 0.036 | |||||
| Pleasant use | –2.19 | –0.028 | 0.524 | 0.045 | |||||
| productivity | –2.34 | –0.41 | 0.649 | 0.009 | |||||
| Clarity of reactions | –2.97 | –0.28 | 0.611 | 0.022 | |||||
| Second interaction | Easy to use | –3.67 | –1.66 | 0.863 | 0.000099 | ||||
| Good task | –2.14 | –0.18 | 0.583 | 0.024 | –3.31 | –0.57 | 0.684 | 0.010 | |
| Pleasant use | –2.02 | –0.63 | 0.755 | 0.001 | –3.38 | –0.74 | 0.738 | 0.006 | |
| Productivity | –2.43 | –0.21 | 0.652 | 0.025 | –4.03 | –0.63 | 0.718 | 0.013 | |
| Satisfaction | –2.46 | –0.04 | 0.527 | 0.044 | –3.49 | –0.39 | 0.749 | 0.021 | |
| Clarity of reaction | –2.94 | –0.16 | 0.557 | 0.031 | |||||
| Easy to brief | –2.24 | –0.04 | 0.529 | 0.043 | –3.01 | –1.10 | 0.802 | 0.000499 | |
| learning to use | –2.87 | –0.47 | 0.687 | 0.011 | |||||
| Overall evaluation | –4.32 | –0.24 | 0.729 | 0.034 | |||||