30.06.2013 Views

Texte intégral / Full text (pdf, 20 MiB) - Infoscience - EPFL

Texte intégral / Full text (pdf, 20 MiB) - Infoscience - EPFL

Texte intégral / Full text (pdf, 20 MiB) - Infoscience - EPFL

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

6.4. Eye-tracking for Interaction<br />

Did the character on screen seem interested or indifferent? (1: very interested, 2: fairly<br />

interested, 3: neither interested nor indifferent, 4: fairly indifferent, 5: very indifferent)<br />

Did the character on screen seem engaged or distracted during the conversation? (1:<br />

very engaged, 2: fairly engaged, 3: neither engaged nor distracted, 4: fairly distracted,<br />

5: very distracted)<br />

Did the character seem friendly or not? (1: very friendly, 2: fairly friendly, 3: neither<br />

friendly nor unfriendly, 4: fairly unfriendly, 5: very unfriendly)<br />

Did the character seem to behave in a normal way with regards to what you were<br />

telling him/her? (1: very normal, 2: fairly normal, 3: neither normal nor abnormal, 4:<br />

fairly abnormal, 5: very abnormal)<br />

The first two questions were asked in order to verify the distinction between attentive<br />

and bored behaviors. The third question does not indicate much, it was only asked in order<br />

to divert attention from the questions specific to our experiment. The fourth question was<br />

asked in order to verify our first hypothesis; that a character which changes behavior is more<br />

realistic than one who does not. It was equally asked in order to verify our second hypothesis;<br />

that a character changing behavior randomly is less realistic than one who changes with<br />

regards to what the subject is looking at. A fifth question was asked in order to obtain<br />

feedback from the subjects on any point which would not have been addressed by their<br />

answers to the previous questions:<br />

On the whole, how would you describe the differences in the characters’ behaviors, if<br />

any, in the four scenes?<br />

6.4.2 Experimental Protocol - Case Study<br />

In addition to the validation conducted on these 12 healthy subjects, we have tested our<br />

application on a young 14 year-old girl suffering from Asperger syndrome. As explained<br />

in the Glossary (see Appendix D), the Asperger syndrome is an Autism Spectrum Disorder<br />

(ASD). One of the diagnostic criteria of the Asperger syndrome is a marked impairment in<br />

social interaction [American Psychiatric Association, 1994].<br />

As a first point, it is important to note that the experiment did not aim at any therapeutic<br />

benefit for the subject. It was aimed to test our architecture with someone having problems<br />

with social situations. This young girl accepted to test our setup and give us her feedback.<br />

She was accompanied by her therapist and her mother for the experiment. Her mother, however,<br />

did not stay in the same room as the experiment went on. We did not tell her what<br />

we were looking for. She was thus naive towards our objectives. As a first step, we seated<br />

her in front of the large back-projection screen on which we displayed the scene depicted in<br />

Figure 6.11. We asked her to wear the coupled eye- and head-tracker and recorded her eye<br />

movements throughout the experiment. We then asked her to do a public speaking exercise,<br />

and talk to the virtual character for a couple of minutes. The complete session lasted for approximately<br />

10 minutes. We first made sure that the character would be attentive even if not<br />

97

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!