Alle Übersetzungen
Zur Navigation springen
Zur Suche springen
Gib einen Nachrichtennamen ein, um alle verfügbaren Übersetzungen anzuzeigen.
Es wurde eine Übersetzung gefunden.
| Name | Aktueller Text |
|---|---|
| V Englisch (en) | === Comparison of the interfaces === The interfaces have the common goal to let subjects indicate emotions in real time and to be able to synchronize the results with a specific stimulus. Differences between the interfaces are some functions and the interface. According to Kopiez et al. understanding the 2DES is not a big problem for the subjects, there just needs to be a short lead time to practice categorizing. In general, this type of survey requires little verbalization ability on the part of the subjects. The authors conclude that EMuJoy is currently the best software implementation. Important arguments for this are the platform independence (e.g. ESL/RTCRR only on Mac systems), high sampling rate and flexibility regarding the stimuli, which do not even necessarily have to be selected before the start of the experiment, but can also be adapted to the subject's reactions. It is intuitive in that it takes up the entire screen and the stimuli are displayed in the background of the coordinate cross. However, the smiley and worm could be distracting or obscure portions of the image. The RTCRR is also rated as positive, but has the disadvantage that per stimulus the program must be copied to produce a usable output file. In contrast to EMuJoy, however, it has a play button in the examination window so that the subject can start the stimulus himself and thus give it his full attention from the beginning (Kopiez et al. 2011, pp. 149-152). This conclusion can be agreed with as far as it goes. EMuJoy seems to be superior to RTCRR, which was developed in the same year, and all other interfaces no longer correspond to the current state of technical development. EMuJoy distinguishes itself mainly through the more intuitive visualization. Compare, for example, the feedback worm on the respective screenshots (see Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.7). pARF stands out due to the mobile application option, but offers a poorer visual appearance and cannot play music. |