## 3 Results
### [PERSON] (aged 75) lived with her husband and son. She was our only participant to indicate full _Non Acceptance_\({}_{\varnothing}\) of the mobile telepresence robot. [PERSON] was familiar with 'gadgets' like Instacart (Instacart--online delivery service platform that allows users to have items delivered to their homes) and smart clocks (Smart Clock--A wireless clock that can connect to the internet for information). This influenced her opinions on robots as she believed robots are \"tools... that help and do stuff for you\". [PERSON] used the mobile telepresence robot with her interaction partner, [PERSON]\({}_{IP}\). [PERSON] was disappointed that the robot did not have more diverse applications, as she had expected it to assist her in her home with tasks like searching for recipes online while cooking. Throughout her experience with the robot, [PERSON] had trouble operating it on her own. This made her confused and agitated throughout the study. She explained this _Lack of Use_\({}_{\varnothing}\) with her belief that she was experiencing a study manipulation that limited her access to the robot and that she was in a different condition compared to [PERSON], a participant she personally knew. Despite the researchers' best efforts to show [PERSON] how to use the robot and explain that there were no study manipulations, she maintained her beliefs throughout the study. She only used the robot during monthly interview sessions when researchers helped her set up her interaction partner on the robot. She concluded that there were \"no benefits at all from this robot\" as no one could \"access\" it (_Non Acceptance_\({}_{\varnothing}\); Figure 6 & Table 8).
#### 3.6.2. Month 1 Interview: Adaptation\({}_{4}\)  
In Month 1, [PERSON]'s **Expectations\({}_{1}\)** (33.33%) descended as the **Adaptation\({}_{4}\)** phase (11.11%) had a primary peak, and the **Identification\({}_{6}\)** phase (44.44%) had a secondary peak. The **Non Use\({}_{\varnothing}\)** phase (11.11%) began ascending.  
During Month 1, [PERSON] did not use the mobile telepresence robot outside the Monthly session (_Lack of Use\({}_{\varnothing}\)_). She had trouble **Adapting\({}_{4}\)** to the robot because she was \"very confused about the robot\" due to \"a lot of issues with the robot moving itself, not being able to work, [and the] battery\" (_Trial and Error\({}_{4}\)_). [PERSON] primarily discussed the lack of mobility, accessibility, and uses of the robot in her life. She also distrusted the robot's structure. \"... the robot would not stand on its own--it rocks--I don't like that...\". She repeated that the \"application is very limited... more limited than I thought it would be\" (_Recognize Disadvantages\({}_{6}\)_). The peaks of **Adaptation\({}_{4}\)** and **Identification\({}_{6}\)** did not indicate that [PERSON] was progressing to acceptance, but rather towards **Non Use\({}_{\varnothing}\)**. In Month 2, [PERSON] had concluded that she was in a separate 'condition' of the study with \"no access to the robot\" to use on her own (_Attitude Formation\({}_{1}\)_, _Lack of Use\({}_{\varnothing}\)_). She often _Discussed\({}_{1}\)_ with a fellow participant ([PERSON]) about the robot and the uses [PERSON] had found for it. [PERSON] formed new opinions about the robot: that it has \"a design issue\" and the only reason she would continue using this robot was for compensation (_Attitude Formation\({}_{1}\)_).