arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2001.03231cs.HCcs.ROstat.APstat.ME
收藏

四年回顾:Likert量表在人机交互研究中的统计实践

Four Years in Review: Statistical Practices of Likert Scales in Human-Robot Interaction Studies

Georgia Institute of Technology(佐治亚理工学院)

Mariah L. Schrum, Michael Johnson, Muyleng Ghuy, Matthew C. Gombolay

摘要:

随着机器人变得越来越普遍,人机交互(HRI)领域的重要性也相应增长。因此,我们应该努力采用最佳统计做法。李克特量表是HRI中常用的衡量观念和态度的指标。由于错误信息或诚实的错误,大多数HRI研究人员在分析Likert数据时没有采用最佳实践。我们进行了心理测量学文献的审查,以确定目前的标准,李克特量表的设计和分析。接下来,我们对四年的人机交互国际会议(2016年至2019年)进行了调查,并报告了不正确的统计实践和李克特量表的设计。在这些年里,只有3 110论文适用于正确设计的李克特量表适当的统计检验。我们的分析表明,在李克特量表的设计和测试方面有一些有意义的改进。最后,我们提供了建议,以提高从李克特数据得出的结论的准确性。

英文摘要:

As robots become more prevalent, the importance of the field of human-robot interaction (HRI) grows accordingly. As such, we should endeavor to employ the best statistical practices. Likert scales are commonly used metrics in HRI to measure perceptions and attitudes. Due to misinformation or honest mistakes, most HRI researchers do not adopt best practices when analyzing Likert data. We conduct a review of psychometric literature to determine the current standard for Likert scale design and analysis. Next, we conduct a survey of four years of the International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2016 through 2019) and report on incorrect statistical practices and design of Likert scales. During these years, only 3 of the 110 papers applied proper statistical testing to correctly-designed Likert scales. Our analysis suggests there are areas for meaningful improvement in the design and testing of Likert scales. Lastly, we provide recommendations to improve the accuracy of conclusions drawn from Likert data.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑