01937nas a2200349   4500000000100000000000100001008004100002260001200043653001900055653001800074653001800092653002000110653000900130100001600139700002200155700002700177700002100204700001500225700001600240700001800256700001700274700001700291700002600308700002100334700001800355245010700373856005800480300000900538490001300547520101300560022001401573       9998                            d  c04/202510aContext of Use10aHaptic Device10aMulti-Session10aUser Experience10aUEQ+1 aJulie Manon1 aJean Vanderdonckt1 aMichael Saint-Guillain1 aVladimir Pletser1 aCyril Wain1 aJean Jacobs1 aAudrey Comein1 aSirga Drouet1 aJulien Meert1 aIgnacio Sanchez Casla1 aOlivier Cartiaux1 aOlivier Cornu00aA Multi-Session Evaluation of a Haptic Device in Normal and Critical Conditions: a Mars Analog Mission  uhttps://www.ijimai.org/journal/bibcite/reference/3579  a1-110 vIn press3 aWhile visual interaction is typically evaluated as an instantaneous, one-shot activity that considers only a snapshot of factors, haptic interaction is more challenging to evaluate as it involves a continuous touch process evolving over time. To better understand how to evaluate haptic interaction, this paper performs a multisession evaluation of a haptic device to be used by astronauts in future lunar and Mars missions, based on eight factors. Three groups of two members (𝑛  = 6 ) applied, either as operator or assistant, a newly developed external fixator (EZExFix) to fix a fracture of the tibial shaft. Astronauts had different levels of expertise, i.e., in anatomy, mechanical engineering, and without, and participated in eight timed runs. Among these eight matches, four sessions were conducted with different time frames and compared to a stress test, a reproduction of the experiment in very stressful conditions, and a session simulating critical conditions in an extra-vehicular activity.  a1989-1660