Skip to Content
Last modified by Shambhawi Pal on 2023/03/06 13:40
From version 4.1
edited by Marijn Roelvink
on 2023/03/03 10:49
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 2.1
edited by Marijn Roelvink
on 2023/02/28 11:42
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -1,19 +1,6 @@
1 -Technology is nowadays everywhere in our life, bringing information, support and enjoyment. However, for elderly people or people with dementia, the normal modes of technology (through smartphones or laptops) are harder to access due to their decreased mental and physical capabilities. The research from [1] shows that using a social robot can improve the elderly's  interaction with technology through the intuitive human-like voice interaction with the robot. Moreover, [1] also showed that interacting with robots through song, games or other activities enhanced the PwD's positive experiences.
1 +- What are the needs of PwDs and relatives?
2 2  
3 -In the research of [2], several needs and results arise through the long term trials with social robots applied in a caring home. The robots' function was mainly supportive in terms of entertainment rather than actual functional tasks. Also, the robot needs to be flexible and capable to adapt to dynamic situations in order to provide actual added value. This last insight is also supported by [3], stating that a robot needs to be able to adapt to a persons needs over time in order to not become repetitive.
3 +- What interaction principles are key for our chosen scenario?
4 4  
5 -[4] has done a ten-week case study on elderly interacting with Pepper. Here, they played different games with Pepper, including physical and cognitive exercises, as well as music quizzes. Several significant lessons emerged from these observations. First of all, the robot needs to speak slowly and clearly, and needs to be able to repeat or break down its instructions in smaller steps if the person does not understand it. Moreover, the interaction still requires some training for the residents. In the first sessions, the residents had to get used to the way the robot interacts, and needed more explicit instructions while after a while, some parts could be skipped as they better knew what to expect from the robot. Furthermore, the researchers noted that the presence of a caregiver was key for the residents as well as for moderation of the robot, as the robot still had some technical and physical limitations. They also concluded that the human-robot interaction was best done in a group setting due to the uncertainty of the residents in dealing with the robot. In the group, the residents could learn from each other and laugh together about the robot. The key take-away from the residents: robots can enhance an activity but not replace human interaction.
6 6  
7 -
8 -Wild: for disabled persons we can make a robot that paints for them through eye tracking: [[https:~~/~~/www.mdpi.com/2218-6581/10/2/54>>https://www.mdpi.com/2218-6581/10/2/54]]
9 -
10 -
11 -
12 -
13 -1. M.-T. Chu, R. Khosla, S. M. S. Khaksar and K. Nguyen, "Service innovation through social robot engagement to improve dementia care quality", //Assistive Technology//, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 8-18, 2017.
14 -1. [[https:~~/~~/ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7451730>>https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7451730]]
15 -1. [[https:~~/~~/ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8673076>>https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8673076]]
16 -1. [[https:~~/~~/dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3313831.3376402>>https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3313831.3376402]]
17 -
18 -
19 19