• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.79-94
• /
• 2013

Recently, the high value added business is steadily growing in the culture and art area. To generated high value from a performance, the satisfaction of audience is necessary. The flow in a critical factor for satisfaction, and it should be induced from audience and measures. To evaluate interest and emotion of audience on contents, producers or investors need a kind of index for the measurement of the flow. But it is neither easy to define the flow quantitatively, nor to collect audience's reaction immediately. The previous studies of the group flow were evaluated by the sum of the average value of each person's reaction. The flow or "good feeling" from each audience was extracted from his face, especially, the change of his (or her) expression and body movement. But it was not easy to handle the large amount of real-time data from each sensor signals. And also it was difficult to set experimental devices, in terms of economic and environmental problems. Because, all participants should have their own personal sensor to check their physical signal. Also each camera should be located in front of their head to catch their looks. Therefore we need more simple system to analyze group flow. This study provides the method for measurement of audiences flow with group synchronization at same time and place. To measure the synchronization, we made real-time processing system using the Differential Image and Group Emotion Analysis (GEA) system. Differential Image was obtained from camera and by the previous frame was subtracted from present frame. So the movement variation on audience's reaction was obtained. And then we developed a program, GEX(Group Emotion Analysis), for flow judgment model. After the measurement of the audience's reaction, the synchronization is divided as Dynamic State Synchronization and Static State Synchronization. The Dynamic State Synchronization accompanies audience's active reaction, while the Static State Synchronization means to movement of audience. The Dynamic State Synchronization can be caused by the audience's surprise action such as scary, creepy or reversal scene. And the Static State Synchronization was triggered by impressed or sad scene. Therefore we showed them several short movies containing various scenes mentioned previously. And these kind of scenes made them sad, clap, and creepy, etc. To check the movement of audience, we defined the critical point, ${\alpha}$and ${\beta}$. Dynamic State Synchronization was meaningful when the movement value was over critical point ${\beta}$, while Static State Synchronization was effective under critical point ${\alpha}$. ${\beta}$ is made by audience' clapping movement of 10 teams in stead of using average number of movement. After checking the reactive movement of audience, the percentage(%) ratio was calculated from the division of "people having reaction" by "total people". Total 37 teams were made in "2012 Seoul DMC Culture Open" and they involved the experiments. First, they followed induction to clap by staff. Second, basic scene for neutralize emotion of audience. Third, flow scene was displayed to audience. Forth, the reversal scene was introduced. And then 24 teams of them were provided with amuse and creepy scenes. And the other 10 teams were exposed with the sad scene. There were clapping and laughing action of audience on the amuse scene with shaking their head or hid with closing eyes. And also the sad or touching scene made them silent. If the results were over about 80%, the group could be judged as the synchronization and the flow were achieved. As a result, the audience showed similar reactions about similar stimulation at same time and place. Once we get an additional normalization and experiment, we can obtain find the flow factor through the synchronization on a much bigger group and this should be useful for planning contents.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.67-75
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The study is to check the specialty of radiotherapists working in the department of radiation oncology and find job satisfaction, organizational commitment and job commitment having an effect on professional parts. After making analysis of the mutual relation, it is to provide radiotechnologists with making progress in the future. Materials and Methods: From March 2 to March 30, we had carried out a survey with email. It is possible to have 272 questionnaires answered in the survey. We make use of SPSS 13.0 for Windows to analyze the data collected for study. Frequency and a percentage are meant to show general characteristics, and t-test and ANOVA to do the difference between general properties and professionalism. Pearson's correlation coefficient also is meant to do the correlation of professionalism, organizational job commitment and job satisfaction, and multiple regression analysis to do the factor for a relevant variable to affect professionalism. Results: There are subdivisions in the professionalism informing us of the self-regulation $17.74{\pm}2.32/3.55{\pm}.46$, a sense of calling $17.58{\pm}2.63/3.52{\pm}.53$, reference of the professional $17.14{\pm}2.39/3.43{\pm}.48$, service to the public $15.97{\pm}2.48/3.19{\pm}50$, and autonomy $15.68{\pm}2.28/3.14{\pm}46$. Grand mean turns out to be $83.89{\pm}7.63$(Summation of items)/$3.37{\pm}0.49$ (Numbers of items). When it comes to a statistical relation between general characteristics and professionalism, the statistics have it that these come within age (P<.001), period of employment (P<.001), education status (P<.05), a monthly income (P<.001), radiotherapists who get a special license (P<.001), the position (P<.001), and an opportunity for developing (P<.001). As a result of organizational commitment, job commitment, and job satisfaction, grand mean in organizational commitment proves to be $80.10{\pm}8.15/3.34{\pm}.34$. There are subvisions showing affective commitment $28.64{\pm}4.61$/3.58, continuance commitment $27.54{\pm}4.22/3.44{\pm}.53$, and normative commitment $23.95{\pm}2.94/2.99{\pm}.37$ in order of precedence. The average grade in job commitment is $32.47{\pm}5.77/3.30{\pm}.60$ and that in job satisfaction is $63.39{\pm}10.16/3.17{\pm}.51$, respectively. We find the positive relationship between professionalism and organizational commitment (r=.522, P<.05), between professionalism and job commitment (r=.444, P<.05), and between professionalism and job satisfaction (r=.507, P<.05). And we also get the positive relationship between organizational commitment and job commitment (r=.549, P<.05), between organizational commitment and job satisfaction (r=.433, P<.05), and between job commitment and job satisfaction (r=.462, P<.05). To catch the factors influencing the professionalism of radiotherapists, we used multiple regression analysis. According to the final model, it appears affective commitment (B=.755, P<.05), normative commitment (B=.305, P<.05), job satisfaction (B=.092, P<.05), an opportunity for developing (B=-1.505, P<.05), and the position (B=-1.155, P<.05) in order of precedence. It seems that explaining influece on $R^2$ is 0.504. Conclusion: The results of the factors that influence professionalism working as radiotherapists in the department of radiation oncology have it that the more affective commitment, normative commitment, and job satisfaction we feel, the more professionalism we recognize. We think that the focus of professionalism is increased if getting the chances for radiotherapists to have little to do with developing opportunities given.