research results

Coming out of last week's discussions with Elmar and Andy, we decided i needed to revisit the actual design process (specifically the sensemaking > synthesis)....  I designed a short internetsurvey to be deployed across a wide range of sites.  The thirty-two responses in the first two days indicate a high level of interest in the topic ("Do you need a Personal Assistive Robot Companion?").... with responses coming from various sectors such as education, commercial and the special needs community.
I tried to keep the survey questions as open ended as possible, without mentioning specific forms or tasks for the robot companion, to see what needs / possibilities the  different communities identify...
Of real interest to me is the disabled and elderly population, however the few forums i tried to join (to post the survey and initiate discussion) still have not got back to me after a week with registration information.... wondering if i answered all the rego questions properly ;) will keep trying ...
The interim results can be seen in the charts below... Click to zoom in....

Survey Results as of 14/10/11

So far, some interesting findings:

• Majority (>75%) of respondents thought the idea "sounded cool" or "would use [a robot companion] all the time"..
• Majority (~60%) of respondents would prefer to buy the device ready-made, with only 20% considering the d.i.y approach.  However Q3 & 4 prove the sampled population is competent with their digital devices and do d.i.ysometimes..  Most stated complexity / time would be the key factor in the decision not to build from plans.
• frequently requested (50% respondents) was the idea of a domestic assistant - vacuum, mow, etc - now, these devices already exist (see: Roomba and associatedhacks).... but were so heavily requested in research that it provides a great incentive to open source....    dishes & laundry? hasn't anyone ever heard of a dishwasher? washing machine? maid??  these frequent requests lead me to believe that even in 2011, with certain demographics, the technology (and awareness thereof) is not as all-pervasive as perhaps we thought?
• a number of respondents identified issues of ownership - with the most interesting ideas being the concept of 'robot-pooling' - or sharing one device between a number of people / neighbourhood / community
• issues of empowering disabled / elderly individuals to be able to be more self-sufficient..... One very specific response from the disabled community strikes a resonant chord within me: "to go ego-less and be able to ask a robot for our special needs".....
• many people wish to offload domestic and repetitive tasks to robots - cleaning and cooking etc.  Especially cooking surprises me.... this brings up so much philosophical debate - how can a robot taste(!>?) Does cooking require love embedded in?
• Also in line with the Latitude study was the stated the desire for a more physical or tangible computing interface - for the device / information to not be trapped within a screen.... along the lines of SIRI
• predominantly natural interactions (71%) & speech (84%) is the preferred interaction method, with some people asking for embedded personality whilst others desired the opposite! (perhaps this comes from a division in generations?  Mushkin also finds kids want personality…)
• Regardless of physical world integration, the vast majority of participants in the Latitude study (83%) desired technologies capable of highly intuitive interaction. They requested responsive virtual environments, 3-D games, “homework help” computers, telepathy as a form of device input (4% of all submissions), etc.
• also, alongside the natural interactions, the survey seemed to identify a certain desire for anthropomorphism with our devices -  the desire for a playfulness of interaction,for the device to interact with the user also....
• backed up with Latitude findings: "Half of all participants visually represented themselves interacting with their invented technologies, supporting the “iGeneration” understanding of device as merely an extension of oneself." devices need to be individual interactive and customisable…. a unique identifier of the user...
  
  
  So far, the impressions i get from the research is of a great deal of interest in the project, with the majority of respondents indicating that the idea "sounds cool" or they would use a Personal Assistive Robot Companion "all the time"...
  My worry is that the desire for the d.i.y community to take a hold of the plans / open source information and modify these for personal requirements is not great - the complexity and cost of such a device puts it out of the reach of a large percentage of the surveyed audience towant to build themselves.
  Indeed, perhaps the best to hope from the creation of a wiki surrounding the tank/esky is the formation of a community of users around the concept... to further the ideation and possibilities afforded by the platform; provide support/maintenance for any devices and users out there already / about to be created; and to provide a sounding ground for new ideas...