.png)
.png)
INTRODUCING GENZ INSURERS
.png)
.png){kind=small}
.png)
.png){kind=small}
.png)
.png){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
Assumptions
Objective
Does playing the PruQuest game or watching a video help youths to retain more knowledge, ceteris paribus.
Do youths prefer a robotic voice or a human voice for the video?
Assumptions
Assumptions
Youth will be able to retain more knowledge through the video as compared to the PruQuest game
Robotic voice is better than a human voice-over for the video conversation due to its professionalism and clarity
Hypothesis
Youths that were part of the video group would be able to perform better than youths that were part of the PruQuest group
Youths would favour the robotic voice conversations over the human voice
Materials
Current PRUQuest
Robotic voice video
Human voice video
Flow of Experiment:
20 participants
1-10 Game Group
11-20 Video Group
PruQuest
Videos
Answer 2 Questions
1. What is sum assured
2. What is co-payment
show them a comparison between the video with human voice and the video with robotic voice
Robotic voice video
Human voice video
Results
-
15/20 prefer robotic voice
​
- 5/20 prefer human voice-over
​
​
-
Pruquest group scored 0.8/2
​
-
Video group scored 1.65/2
​
-
8/10 participants in the game group skipped the conversation
​
-
1/10 participant in the video group skipped the conversation
Insights
01
Youths are able to retain knowledge better through the video
02
Youths prefer a robotic voice over human voice-over for the video
03
Youths find that the video is able to engage them better as compared to the game
Conclusion
Both hypothesis are correct
​
Youths felt that the video format is able to better captivate their attention with its bright colours and animations.
​
Youths also felt that the robotic voice was more professional and the conversation was clear unlike the human voice-over which was a bit muffled.