length of the surgery. Both groups felt that RAS slightly shortened the procedure’s length. Figure 5 - Perceived Impact on Length of Procedure: How do you think robotic surgery influenced the length of your procedure? PERCEPTIONS OF SURGICAL ROBOTICS - Gilbert, Kechris, Marchese, Pelletier Patient Practitioner General number of procedures 1 = 0 to 5 2 = 5 to 10 3 = 10 to 20 4 = 20 to 30 5 = 30 to 40 6 = 50 or more Precieved RAS Learning Curve Perceived RAS Learning Curve Means calculated from data regarding perceived RAS learning curves for each of the three populations were graphed. Patient and general populations have statistically significant differences (p = 0.013). For Practitioners M = 4.59, SD = 1.27, N = 29. For the general population M = 4.25, SD = 1.51, N = 88. Overall, all three populations seemed to lean towards the belief that there is a slightly high learning curve for RAS, requiring that surgeons perform a significant number of RAS operations before they become highly skilled. Surveyed patients felt that surgeons needed more practice before becoming highly skilled than participants of the other two surveyed populations. On average, the general population along with the practitioner population seemed to agree that the RAS learning curve was moderately high, though not as high as perceived by the patient population. Figure 6 - Perceived RAS Learning Curve: How many procedures do you think a surgeon needs to perform before they become highly skilled at robotic assisted surgery? PERCEPTIONS OF SURGICAL ROBOTICS - Gilbert, Kechris, Marchese, Pelletier - 25 - Discussion The primary findings of this study successfully impart insight on the social perceptions of RAS, with a focus on three specific populations: general public, patient, and practitioner. Results obtained through analysis of collected data produced several focal points highlighting key differences among the populations. One notable result was extracted from the data regarding the relationship between comfort with technology and acceptance of RAS for the general and patient populations. As the patient population’s comfort with technology increased, its acceptance of RAS decreased. This result was unexpected. The general population fell in line more so with the expected relationships between these two variables, illustrating an increase in comfort with technology with an increase in acceptance of RAS. Another unanticipated result appeared when determining the mean response for each of the three population’s perceptions of the impact of RAS on surgery recovery time. The patient population illustrated an understanding that RAS decreases recovery time after surgery. Remarkably, the practitioner population demonstrated the belief that RAS actually lengthens recovery time. The research group expected the practitioner population to best understand RAS’s impact on recovery time. Members of this population were the only ones with sufficient relevant experience regarding both the different procedures under question to make a knowledgeable comparison. Perhaps this unanticipated result is an artifact of the manner in which the survey question was asked. The patient population exhibited the highest perceived RAS learning curve. This could be a result of their firsthand, intimate experience with RAS, having undergone the procedure and trusting it with their lives. It was anticipated that members of a population whose lives were put at risk for RAS would feel most strongly towards surgeons needing a significant amount of practice before being considered highly skilled. Also noteworthy, all three populations expressed the perception that leaned toward the PERCEPTIONS OF SURGICAL ROBOTICS - Gilbert, Kechris, Marchese, Pelletier - 26 - higher learning curve among the available survey question choices. No one group demonstrated the mindset that the RAS learning curve was significantly low relative to the choices presented. One potential discrepancy among the surveys could have been the inadequately defined term, “traditional surgery.” The definition of this term was left open for interpretation by members across all three surveyed populations. A member from the general population could perceive traditional surgery as open surgery, whereas a member from the practitioner population may perceive the same term as referring to laparoscopic surgery. Having specified the intended meaning of this term (laparoscopic) could have circumvented inconsistencies among survey responses and made for a more valid comparison of each data set. Future Work Future research may help to unveil other patterns among the populations and measure perceptions regarding this growing surgical technology.The success of the technology and the extent to which it adds to the previous state of art are directly linked to how it is received by society. Negative feelings or skepticism could affect the incorporation of the technology into the field in a drastically different manner than positivity and complete acceptance could. That said, a close examination of patient and doctor perception is an important aspect of the technology. These perceptions are worth monitoring and analyzing as time passes and robot-assisted surgery becomes more prevalent in the surgical field. PERCEPTIONS OF SURGICAL ROBOTICS - Gilbert, Kechris,