Table 6.
Participants’ overall evaluation: compliance and feasibility/utility scores (1 = min, 5 = max).
| Group | Presence at meetings | Compliance to the synchronous phase | Compliance to prompts | Final Production | Compliance to the asynchronous phase | Feasibility score (mean values) | Utility score (mean values) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 5 | 100% | 14/14 | Yes | 100% | 4 | 2.75 |
| A | 3 | 60% | 7/14 | No | 50% | 4.77 | 4 |
| B | 5 | 100% | 14/16 | Yes | 87.50% | 4.23 | 5 |
| B | 3 | 60% | 13/16 | Yes | 81.25% | 5 | 5 |
| B | 5 | 100% | 16/16 | Yes | 100% | 4.67 | 3.5 |
| B | 5 | 100% | 16/16 | Yes | 100% | 3.23 | 4.25 |
| C | 5 | 100% | 16/16 | Yes | 100% | 4 | 4.25 |
| C | 5 | 100% | 16/16 | Yes | 100% | 4 | 4.25 |
| C | 2 | 40% | 3/16 | No | 18.75% | 3.37 | 3.75 |
| C | 5 | 100% | 16/16 | Yes | 100% | 4.4 | 4.5 |
| C | 4 | 80% | 12/16 | Yes | 75% | 4.5 | 4.25 |
| C | 2 | 40% | 9/16 | No | 56.25% | 3.37 | 4 |