## 4 Experimental Environment and Results
### Field Study Results
#### 4.3.1 First Phase Implementation Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l} \hline \hline
**Field Study Details** & **n (\%)** \\ \hline Session Distribution & \\ Group sessions & 15 (60\%) \\ Individual sessions & 10 (40\%) \\ \hline Service Type Distribution & \\ Home care service & 7 (28\%) \\ Community care center & 5 (22\%) \\ Daycare center & 5 (22\%) \\ Community service station & 5 (22\%) \\ Cognitive leisure station & 2 (6\%) \\ \hline Participant Group & \\ Professional caregivers & 62 (50\%) \\ Children & 46 (37\%) \\ Foreign caregivers & 12 (9\%) \\ Family members & 4 (3\%) \\ Neighbors & 1 (1\%) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Phase one field study: distribution of sites and participants. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l} \hline \hline
**Metric** & **Group Institution** & **Individual Home Care** \\ \hline SUS score & 85.32 & 77.85 \\ Learnability & 92.12 & 89.12 \\ Usability & 83.63 & 75.03 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Comparative analysis of system performance: group institution vs. individual home care settings. overall system usability and specific usability measures. **Six-Dimensional Analysis**  
This study employed radar charts to visualize the evaluation results across six dimensions: technology acceptance, social interaction, attractiveness, sense of achievement, ease of use, and expectation (as shown in Figure 10). Through paired t-tests and effect size analyses, our findings revealed significant patterns:  
1. **Expectation and Technology Acceptance**: Group contexts demonstrated superior performance, in terms of both expectations (M = 4.3, SD = 0.42 vs. M = 3.0, SD = 0.38; t(657) = 12.45, \(p\) < 0.001, d = 3.25) and technology acceptance (M = 4.2, SD = 0.45 vs. M = 3.5, SD = 0.41; t(657) = 10.32, \(p\) < 0.001, d = 1.63). 2. **Sense of Achievement and Operational Effectiveness**: The sense of achievement showed a significant improvement in group settings (M = 4.0, SD = 0.38 vs. M = 3.0, SD = 0.42; t(657) = 11.24, \(p\) < 0.001, d = 2.50), while operational convenience maintained consistency across the different contexts (M = 4.0, SD = 0.40 vs. M = 4.0, SD = 0.41; t(657) = 0.45, \(p\) = 0.652, d = 0.00). 3. **Attractiveness and Social Interaction**: Group contexts significantly excelled in both attractiveness (M = 4.5, SD = 0.39 vs. M = 3.3, SD = 0.43; t(657) = 13.56, \(p\) < 0.001, d = 2.92) and social interaction (M = 4.4, SD = 0.41 vs. M = 3.4, SD = 0.44; t(657) = 12  
The analysis revealed that, except for operational convenience, all dimensions showed statistically significant advantages for group contexts (ps \(<\) 0.001, ds \(>\) 1.60). Particularly noteworthy were the exceptionally large effect sizes for expectation (d = 3.25), attractiveness (d = 2.92), and a sense of achievement (d = 2.50), highlighting the substantial impact of group activities in promoting technology use among elderly populations (Table 5). **Analysis of System Performance Across Different User Groups**  
The first-phase field study employed a systematic six-dimensional analysis to examine the system's performance across three distinct user groups, revealing significant patterns in both the quantitative and qualitative aspects (Figure 11). The statistical analysis demonstrated differentiated yet consistently positive outcomes across all user categories, with each group showing unique response patterns to the system's features. The dementia group achieved a notably high overall SUS score of 85.32, with particularly strong performance in three key dimensions: social interaction (4.3/5.0), ease of use (4.5/5.0), and attractiveness (4.2/5.0). Qualitative observations further revealed enhanced engagement patterns with caregivers and children, suggesting the system's effectiveness in facilitating natural integration into daily activities while bridging intergenerational gaps. These findings support the system's capacity to maintain high usability, even for users with cognitive challenges. Figure 11: Six-dimensional analysis results for different user groups.