## 3 Results
### [PERSON] (widower), lived alone and was our eldest participant (aged 84). He was our only participant with past experience with robots, and he had a strong passion for robotics and technology. In the 1980s, working as a communication technician for a company, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Alaska, he assembled robot components and tracked communication with the pilots. During that time, he helped implement robots in high schools. Early in his career, he worked as a sales manager of cell phones and pagers as their popularity rose. After retirement, [PERSON] regularly met past colleagues and friends who had similar backgrounds or worked in related fields, like Engineering. He enjoyed frequently sharing and discussing his robot with them. [PERSON] used the mobile telepresence robot with his two interaction partners, \(\text{[PERSON]}_{IP}\) and \(\text{[PERSON]}_{IP}\). [PERSON] was also very passionate in his interviews about his beliefs that \"a lot of [older adults have] fear and confusion [about technology, which] must stem from 'computer illiteracy\" and people getting \"nervous about privacy\". Despite some issues with his robot's battery in Month 1,David had a positive experience and moved very quickly into later acceptance phases. He used the robot with two different interaction partners (Figure 5 & Table 7).  
#### 3.5.1 House Tour Interview: Expectation1 and Adoption3  
During his House Tour, [PERSON] had primary peaks of **Expectation1** (71.43%) and **Adoption3** phases (28.57%).  
[PERSON] based many of his **Expectations1** of this mobile telepresence robot on his prior experiences working with robots for the FAA. He felt there was \"a lot of confusion about the word robot...\" He described a robot as \"typically something that a human operator remote [controlled]... an autonomous robot is not really a robot; it's an autonomous device that does its own thing\" (_Association1_). [PERSON] looked forward to his encounter with the robot and \"see[ing] what it is capable of\" (_Anticipation1_).  
These _Anticipations1_ directly led to **Adoption3** as his _Excitement3_ surfaced. This \"technology is interesting\", he said, adding that he will \"just have to see it to know\" if the robot could compliment his social life (_Curiosity3_, _Excitement3_). Having past positive experiences with robots, [PERSON] sought more information about it and embraced positive feelings about the robot's potential. He used this House Tour to prepare himself and his home for the robot, adjusting preconceived ideas of floor space needed and the movement abilities of this robot (_Adjustment3_). Later, during [PERSON]'s first encounter with the robot (Bringing the Robot), he noticed that the \"camera seems to have the ability to look up...\" (_Exploration5_).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Phase** & **House Tour** & **Bringing Robot** & **M1** & **M2** & **M3** & **M4** & **M5** & **M6** & **M7** \\ \hline Expectation1 & PP & D & D & D & - & - & SP & - & SP \\ \hline Adoption3 & PP & - & SP & - & - & - & - & - & - \\ \hline Adaptation4 & - & - & - & PP & - & - & - & - & - \\ \hline Integrations5 & - & SP & V & SP & V & A & PP & V & SP \\ \hline Identification6 & - & A & SP & A & PP & D & V & SP & D \\ \hline Non Use\({}_{\varnothing}\) & - & - & H & - & - & - & - & - & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 7: [PERSON]’s acceptance of technology phases.  
Figure 5: Phased framework of technology acceptance [9] coding totals for [PERSON]. All percentages add to 100% per interview. HT—House Tour; BR—Bringing Robot; M—Month.