## 5 Testing, Results, and Analysis
### Evaluation Approach and Instruments for the Case Study

Table 6: Simulation Evaluation Questionnaire. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline  & **Questions** & **Answers** \\ \hline
1 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} How much were you able to control the maneuverability of the \\ wheelchair when interacting with objects? \\ How much were you able to control the maneuverability of the \\ wheelchair when moving? \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} (1) None; (2) Little; (3) Moderate; (4) Quite a lot; (5) A lot \\ \end{tabular} \\
2 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Regarding maneuverability, does it allow the person to position \\ themselves correctly when interacting with the different devices? \\ Example: Entering the restroom and making turns to position \\ themselves in the transfer area. \\ Do you consider that the person can perform actions and interact \\ with objects without the need to perform full maneuvers \\ (understood as full maneuvers such as 180\({}^{\circ}\), 360\({}^{\circ}\) and \\ reverse turns)? \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} (1) Strongly Disagree; (2) Disagree; (3) Neither Agree nor Disagree; (4) Agree; (5) Strongly Agree \\ \end{tabular} \\
5 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Interactions with switches and sockets: Do you consider them to be \\ adequate for the evaluation of the the housing? \\ Interactions with bathroom and kitchen faucets: Do you consider \\ them to be adequate for the evaluation of the accessibility of \\ the housing? \\ Do you consider that the visual guides are clear and help to \\ understand what to do within the simulation (where to go, how to \\ interact), thinking about a person with a disability? \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} (1) Strongly Disagree; (2) Disagree; (3) Neither Agree nor Disagree; (4) Agree; (5) Strongly Agree \\ \end{tabular} \\
11 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} How much do you think the sound aspects affect immersion for a \\ person with a physical disability? \\ \end{tabular} &
2 & \begin{tabular}{c} We do not consider that the simulation would represent a \\ real situation in which a person with a physical disability could \\ perform an activity of daily living? \\ Do you consider that the simulation succeeds in representing the \\ conditions of a physically disabled person in a wheelchair? \\ The movements correspond to the character and the chair: do you \\ consider that they achieve real movements and in real time, \\ thinking of a person with a physical disability? \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} (1) Strongly Disagree; (2) Disagree; (3) Neither Agree nor Disagree; (3) Neither Agree nor Disagree; (4) Agree; (5) Strongly Agree \\ Do you consider that crashes or collisions manage to recreate real \\ crashes with a person with physical disabilities in mind? \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} (3) Strongly Aspire (4) Agree; (5) Strongly Agree \\ \end{tabular} \\
5 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Are the interactions with switches and sockets realistic with a \\ person with a physical disability in mind? \\ Are interactions with bathroom and kitchen keys realistic with \\ a person with a physical disability in mind? \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} (1) None; (2) A little; (3) Moderate; (4) Quite a lot; (5) A lot \\ \end{tabular} \\
6 &
\begin{tabular}{c} (1) None; (2) A little; (3) Moderate; (4) Quite a lot; (5) A lot \\ \end{tabular} \\
7 &
\begin{tabular}{c} (1) None; (2) A little; (3) Moderate; (4) Quite a lot; (5) A lot \\ \end{tabular} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Evaluation questionnaire for UAH parameters.