Designing a Stress and Anxiety Support Tool to Help Young Adults with Autism in Daily Living
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Individuals with autism may experience higher stress and anxiety levels for longer periods than their neurotypical peers. Traditional techniques to provide stress relief and anxiety management include support, which reminds people of how to face stressful situations. Some technological proposals supporting the user include strategies for detecting and monitoring stress levels. In this research, we conducted an iterative user-centered study aiming to understand how young adults with autism deal with stress in real-life situations. We proposed a set of five design principles that will serve as guidelines to develop assistive anxiety management technology for individuals with autism. We then developed a set of low-fi prototypes and selected SATORI, a support tool composed of three interfaces, to help young adults with autism autonomously manage the anxiety caused by stressful situations in their daily life. We evaluated our proposed design principles using SATORI with eight young adults with autism. The results show a positive perception of the design principles on what SATORI is based on, as participants perceived that SATORI could help them in their daily life to manage stress and channel anxiety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it