Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBradwell, Hannah
dc.contributor.authorAguiar Noury, Gabriel
dc.contributor.authorEdwards, Katie
dc.contributor.authorWinnington, Rhona
dc.contributor.authorThill, Serge
dc.contributor.authorJones, Ray B.
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Health & Human Sciencesen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-24T17:51:27Z
dc.date.available2021-06-24T17:51:27Z
dc.date.issued2021-06
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/17275
dc.description.abstract

Objectives Socially assistive robots (SAR) may have an important role in health and social care. Design of such SAR can be informed through detailed studies with end-users, but we also need shared understanding of SAR between developers and those influencing policy. We aimed to explore the acceptability of using SAR across a broad range of stakeholders who could influence policy and identify design considerations for developers. Methods We gave live demonstrations of a range of SAR rather than passive materials such as pictures, and used an acceptability model (Almere Model) as framework for analysis. Eight exhibitions involved live demonstrations and interaction with two robot animals (Paro and Miro), a humanoid (Pepper) and function-oriented telepresence robot (Padbot). 223 health and social care professionals, service users and small companies participated. Unstructured free interactions with robots were video recorded, transcribed, and content analysed. Themes were mapped onto the Almere Model of acceptability where components and design recommendations deduced. Results Three-quarters of attendees interacted with robots (n=167). Practical design changes identified were: (i) improved mobility for uneven floors and carpets, (ii) improved voice recognition and accent interpretation, (iii) better ease of use (mainly Pepper), (iv) enhanced robustness and battery life/autonomous charging, (v) soft, friendly aesthetics, (vi) anthropomorphic or biomorphic design (non-robotic) for friendliness and social presence, (vii) androgynous appearance. Conclusion Health and social care stakeholders are open to use of SAR and see potential in this field, however, practical issues such as robustness, battery life, voice/accent recognition and mobility need to be addressed.

en_US
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherUniversity of Plymouthen
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectsocial robots, robot pets, user-centred design, older adults, dementiaen_US
dc.titleDesign recommendations for socially assistive robots for health and social care based on a large scale analysis of stakeholder positionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 United States

All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV