Socially intelligent robots that understand and respond to human touch

Touch is an important nonverbal form of interpersonal interaction which is used to communicate emotions and other social messages. As interactions with social robots are likely to become more common in the near future these robots should also be able to engage in tactile interaction with humans. Therefore, the aim of the research presented in this dissertation is to work towards socially intelligent robots that can understand and respond to human touch. To become a socially intelligent actor a robot must be able to sense, classify and interpret human touch and respond to this in an appropriate manner. To this end we present work that addresses different parts of this interaction cycle. The contributions of this dissertation are the following. We have made a touch gesture dataset available to the research community and have presented benchmark results. Furthermore, we have sparked interest into the new field of social touch recognition by organizing a machine learning challenge and have pinpointed directions for further research. Also, we have exposed potential difficulties for the recognition of social touch in more naturalistic settings. Moreover, the findings presented in this dissertation can help to inform the design of a behavioral model for robot pet companions that can understand and respond to human touch. Additionally, we have focused on the requirements for tactile interaction with robot pets for health care applications

Robot companion cats for people at home with dementia: a qualitative case study on companotics

The use of robot companion pets for people in care homes has been extensively studied. The results are largely positive, and suggest that they are valuable in enhancing wellbeing, communication and behavioural aspects. However, there has been little research in people’s own homes, possibly due to the cost and complexity of some of the robot pets currently available. As dementia affects people in different ways, this study explores the effects of a robot cat for people in their own homes, without specifically investigating the effects on a particular symptom. We utilised a case study design to investigate the proposition that various factors influence the impact of a robot cat on the person living with dementia and their carer, including acceptability of the robot pet and acceptance of dementia and its symptoms. The qualitative analysis explores the similarities and differences within the data which were gathered during interviews with people with dementia and their families. This analysis revealed four themes: Distraction, Communication, Acceptance and rejection, and Connecting with the cat and connecting with others. These themes were synthesized into two overarching themes: The effect of the cat on mood and behaviour, and The interaction with the cat. We present the acceptability and impact of the robot cat on symptoms of dementia, with data presented across and within the group of participants. Our analysis suggests that benefits of the robot pet were evident, and although this was a small-scale study, where they were accepted, robot pets provided positive outcomes for the participants and their families

Ethical perceptions towards real-world use of companion robots with older people and people with dementia: survey opinions among younger adults

Contains fulltext : 221334.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Background: Use of companion robots may reduce older people's depression, loneliness and agitation. This benefit has to be contrasted against possible ethical concerns raised by philosophers in the field around issues such as deceit, infantilisation, reduced human contact and accountability. Research directly assessing prevalence of such concerns among relevant stakeholders, however, remains limited, even though their views clearly have relevance in the debate. For example, any discrepancies between ethicists and stakeholders might in itself be a relevant ethical consideration while concerns perceived by stakeholders might identify immediate barriers to successful implementation. Methods: We surveyed 67 younger adults after they had live interactions with companion robot pets while attending an exhibition on intimacy, including the context of intimacy for older people. We asked about their perceptions of ethical issues. Participants generally had older family members, some with dementia. Results: Most participants (40/67, 60%) reported having no ethical concerns towards companion robot use when surveyed with an open question. Twenty (30%) had some concern, the most common being reduced human contact (10%), followed by deception (6%). However, when choosing from a list, the issue perceived as most concerning was equality of access to devices based on socioeconomic factors (m = 4.72 on a scale 1-7), exceeding more commonly hypothesized issues such as infantilising (m = 3.45), and deception (m = 3.44). The lowest-scoring issues were potential for injury or harm (m = 2.38) and privacy concerns (m = 2.17). Over half (39/67 (58%)) would have bought a device for an older relative. Cost was a common reason for choosing not to purchase a device. Conclusions: Although a relatively small study, we demonstrated discrepancies between ethical concerns raised in the philosophical literature and those likely to make the decision to buy a companion robot. Such discrepancies, between philosophers and ‘end-users’ in care of older people, and in methods of ascertainment, are worthy of further empirical research and discussion. Our participants were more concerned about economic issues and equality of access, an important consideration for those involved with care of older people. On the other hand the concerns proposed by ethicists seem unlikely to be a barrier to use of companion robots.10 p

Ethical perceptions towards real-world use of companion robots with older people and people with dementia: Survey opinions among younger adults

Background: Use of companion robots may reduce older people’s depression, loneliness and agitation. This benefit has to be contrasted against possible ethical concerns raised by philosophers in the field around issues such as deceit, infantilisation, reduced human contact and accountability. Research directly assessing prevalence of such concerns among relevant stakeholders, however, remains limited, even though their views clearly have relevance in the debate. For example, any discrepancies between ethicists and stakeholders might in itself be a relevant ethical consideration while concerns perceived by stakeholders might identify immediate barriers to successful implementation. Methods: We surveyed 67 younger adults after they had live interactions with companion robot pets while attending an exhibition on intimacy, including the context of intimacy for older people. We asked about their perceptions of ethical issues. Participants generally had older family members, some with dementia. Results: Most participants (40/67, 60%) reported having no ethical concerns towards companion robot use when surveyed with an open question. Twenty (30%) had some concern, the most common being reduced human contact (10%), followed by deception (6%). However, when choosing from a list, the issue perceived as most concerning was equality of access to devices based on socioeconomic factors (m=4.72 on a scale 1-7), exceeding more commonly hypothesized issues such as infantilising (m=3.45), and deception (m=3.44). The lowest-scoring issues were potential for injury or harm (m=2.38) and privacy concerns (m=2.17). Over half (39/67 (58%)) would have bought a device for an older relative. Cost was a common reason for choosing not to purchase a device. Conclusions: Although a relatively small study we demonstrated discrepancies between ethical concerns raised in the philosophical literature and those likely to make the decision to buy a companion robot. Such discrepancies, between philosophers and ‘end-users’ in care of older people, and in methods of ascertainment, are worthy of further empirical research and discussion. Our participants were more concerned about economic issues and equality of access, an important consideration for those involved with care of older people. On the other hand the concerns proposed by ethicists seem unlikely to be a barrier to use of companion robots

Use of a Social Robot (LOVOT) for Persons With Dementia:Exploratory Study

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50 million people worldwide are living with dementia. Social robots have been developed and tested to determine whether they improve the quality of life for persons with dementia. A new mobile social robot called LOVOT has artificial intelligence and sensor technologies built in. LOVOT, which is manufactured in Japan, has not yet been tested for use by persons with dementia. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore how the social robot LOVOT interacts with persons with dementia and how health care professionals experience working with LOVOT in their interaction with persons with dementia. METHODS: The study was carried out at 3 nursing homes in Denmark, all with specialized units for persons with dementia. The interaction between the persons with dementia and LOVOT was tested in both individual sessions for 4 weeks and group sessions for 12 weeks. A total of 42 persons were included in the study, of which 12 were allocated to the individual sessions. A triangulation of data collection techniques was used: the World Health Organization-5 questionnaire, face scale, participant observation, and semistructured focus group interviews with health care professionals (n=3). RESULTS: There were no clinically significant changes in the well-being of the persons with dementia followed in the individual or group interaction sessions over time. The results from the face scale showed that in both the individual and group sessions, persons with dementia tended to express more positive facial expressions after the sessions. Findings on how persons with dementia experienced their interaction with LOVOT can be stated in terms of the following themes: LOVOT opens up communication and interaction; provides entertainment; creates a breathing space; is accepted and creates joy; induces feelings of care; can create an overstimulation of feelings; is not accepted; is perceived as an animal; is perceived as being nondemanding; and prevents touch deprivation. Findings regarding the health care professionals’ experiences using LOVOT were as follows: the artificial behavior seems natural; and it is a communication tool that can stimulate, create feelings of security, and open up communication. Our findings indicate that the social robot is a tool that can be used in interactions with persons with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: The LOVOT robot is the next generation of social robots with advanced artificial intelligence. The vast majority of persons with dementia accepted the social robot LOVOT. LOVOT had positive effects, opened up communication, and facilitated interpersonal interaction. Although LOVOT did not create noticeable effects on social well-being, it gave individual persons a respite from everyday life. Some residents were overstimulated by emotions after interacting with LOVOT. Health care professionals accepted the social robot and view LOVOT as a new tool in the work with persons with dementia

Robot companion cats for people at home with dementia: A qualitative case study on companotics

Pike J., Picking R., & Cunningham S. (2021). Robot companion cats for people at home with dementia: A qualitative case study on companotics. Dementia, 20(4), 1300-1318. Copyright © [2021] (The Authors). Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications.The use of robot companion pets for people in care homes has been extensively studied. The results are largely positive and suggest that they are valuable in enhancing wellbeing, communication and behavioural aspects. However, there has been little research in people’s own homes, possibly due to the cost and complexity of some of the robot pets currently available. As dementia affects people in different ways, this study explores the effects of a robot cat for people in their own homes, without specifically investigating the effects on a particular symptom. We utilised a case study design to investigate the proposition that various factors influence the impact of a robot cat on the person living with dementia and their carer, including acceptability of the robot pet and acceptance of dementia and its symptoms. The qualitative analysis explores the similarities and differences within the data which were gathered during interviews with people with dementia and their families. This analysis revealed four themes: Distraction, Communication, Acceptance and rejection, and Connecting with the cat and connecting with others. These themes were synthesised into two overarching themes: the effect of the cat on mood and behaviour, and The interaction with the cat. We present the acceptability and impact of the robot cat on symptoms of dementia, with data presented across and within the group of participants. Our analysis suggests that benefits of the robot pet were evident, and although this was a small-scale study, where they were accepted, robot pets provided positive outcomes for the participants and their families

Morphology of socially assistive robots for health and social care: A reflection on 24 months of research with anthropomorphic, zoomorphic and mechanomorphic devices

Contains fulltext : 236633.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)This paper reflects on four studies completed over the last 24 months, with social robots including Pepper, Paro, Joy for All cats and dogs, Miro, Pleo, Padbot and cheaper toys, including i) focus groups and interviews on suitable robot pet design, ii) surveys on ethical perceptions of robot pets, and iii) recorded interactions between stakeholders and a range of social robots. In total, up to 371 participants' views were included across the analysed studies. Data was reviewed and mined for relevance to the use and impact of morphology types for social robots in health and social care. Results suggested biomorphic design was preferable over mechanomorphic, and speech and life-simulation features (such as breathing) were well received. Anthropomorphism demonstrated some limitations in evoking fear and task-expectations that were absent for zoomorphic designs. The combination of familiar, zoomorphic appearance with animacy, life-simulation and speech capabilities thus appeared to be an area of research for future robots developed for health and social care.2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (Vancouver, Canada, 8-12 Aug. 2021

Companion robots for older people: importance of user-centred design demonstrated through observations and focus groups comparing preferences of older people and roboticists in South West England.

Companion robots for older people: importance of usercentred design demonstrated through observations and focus groups comparing preferences of older people and roboticists in South West England. BMJ Open 2019;9:e032468. doi:10.1136/ bmjopen-2019-032468 ► Prepublication history and additional material for this paper are available online. To view these files, please visit the journal online (http://dx.doi. org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019- 032468). Received 25 June 2019 Revised 05 September 2019 Accepted 09 September 2019 For numbered affiliations see end of article. Correspondence to Hannah Louise Bradwell; hannah.bradwell@plymouth. ac.uk Original research © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. Abstract Objective Companion robots, such as Paro, may reduce agitation and depression for older people with dementia. However, contradictory research outcomes suggest robot design is not always optimal. While many researchers suggest user-centred design is important, there is little evidence on the difference this might make. Here, we aimed to assess its importance by comparing companion robot design perceptions between older people (end users) and roboticists (developers). Design Older people and roboticists interacted with eight companion robots or alternatives at two separate events in groups of two to four people. Interactions were recorded, participants’ comments and observations were transcribed, and content was analysed. Subsequently, each group participated in focus groups on perceptions of companion robot design. Discussions were recorded and transcribed, and content was analysed. Participants and settings Seventeen older people (5 male, 12 female, ages 60–99) at a supported living retirement complex, and 18 roboticists (10 male, 8 female, ages 24–37) at a research centre away-day. Results We found significant differences in design preferences between older people and roboticists. Older people desired soft, furry, interactive animals that were familiar and realistic, while unfamiliar forms were perceived as infantilising. By contrast, most roboticists eschewed familiar and realistic designs, thinking unfamiliar forms better suited older people. Older people also expressed desire for features not seen as important by developers. A large difference was seen in attitude towards ability to talk: 12/17 (71%) older people but only 2/18 (11%) roboticists requested speech. Older people responded positively towards life-simulation features, eye contact, robot personalisation and obeying commands, features undervalued by roboticists. These differences were reflected in preferred device, with ‘Joy for All’ cat chosen most often by older people, while roboticists most often chose Paro. Conclusion The observed misalignment of opinion between end users and developers on desirable design features of companion robots demonstrates the need for user-centred design during development

How do "robopets" impact the health and well-being of residents in care homes? A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative evidence

This is the final version. Available on open access from Wiley via the DOI in this recordBACKGROUND: Robopets are small animal-like robots which have the appearance and behavioural characteristics of pets. OBJECTIVE: To bring together the evidence of the experiences of staff, residents and family members of interacting with robopets and the effects of robopets on the health and well-being of older people living in care homes. DESIGN: Systematic review of qualitative and quantitative research. DATA SOURCES: We searched 13 electronic databases from inception to July 2018 and undertook forward and backward citation chasing. METHODS: Eligible studies reported the views and experiences of robopets from residents, family members and staff (qualitative studies using recognised methods of qualitative data collection and analysis) and the effects of robopets on the health and well-being of care home residents (randomised controlled trials, randomised crossover trials and cluster randomised trials). Study selection was undertaken independently by two reviewers. We used the Wallace criteria and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of the evidence. We developed a logic model with stakeholders and used this as a framework to guide data extraction and synthesis. Where appropriate, we used meta-analysis to combine effect estimates from quantitative studies. RESULTS: Nineteen studies (10 qualitative, 2 mixed methods and 7 randomised trials) met the inclusion criteria. Interactions with robopets were described as having a positive impact on aspects of well-being including loneliness, depression and quality of life by residents and staff, although there was no corresponding statistically significant evidence from meta-analysis for these outcomes. Meta-analysis showed evidence of a reduction in agitation with the robopet "Paro" compared to control (-0.32 [95% CI -0.61 to -0.04, p = 0.03]). Not everyone had a positive experience of robopets. CONCLUSIONS: Engagement with robopets appears to have beneficial effects on the health and well-being of older adults living in care homes, but not all chose to engage. Whether the benefits can be sustained are yet to be investigated. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Robopets have the potential to benefit people living in care homes, through increasing engagement and interaction. With the robopet acting as a catalyst, this engagement and interaction may afford comfort and help reduce agitation and loneliness.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

User-defined challenges and desiderata for robotics and autonomous systems in health and social care settings

We report the needs and challenges identified by health and social care professionals and service users for robotics and autonomous systems that are of importance to researchers and policymakers. To this end, we held eight workshops in different locations across Cornwall (UK) in which we raised awareness of the applications and opportunities of assistive robots. The 223 participants could interact physically with four robots, watched a multimedia presentation including video and use-case scenarios and then took part in 33 focus groups. Content analysis was carried out based on summaries written by facilitators during the focus groups. The focus groups produced 163 challenges that may have digital solutions including 78 suitable for robotic assistive technology, in three main areas: maintaining independence at home, social isolation, and rurality. Although further research is needed with technology and its implementation, this study shows that health and social care professionals, patients, carers, and students are willing to consider using robotics and autonomous systems in health and social care settings