Cover not available
Article published In:
Social Cues in Robot Interaction, Trust and Acceptance
Edited by Alessandra Rossi, Kheng Lee Koay, Silvia Moros, Patrick Holthaus and Marcus Scheunemann
[Interaction Studies 20:3] 2019
► pp. 426–454

Investigating the preferences of older adults concerning the design elements of a companion robot

Analysis on type, weight and material of companion robot

| Yonsei University
| Yonsei University
| Hanyang University
Researchers have reported that companion robots have had positive effects on older adults with depression. However, there has been little quantitative analysis on the relationship between robot design and depression. To address this, we surveyed 191 older adults and investigated the impact of age, gender and depression level on design preferences for companion robots. We focused on toy-sized companion robots and evaluated three design elements: type, weight and material. The findings show that baby-type robots were the most preferred by older adults. They favoured the lightest weights and microfibre materials, regardless of the independent variables. Moreover, robot weight preferences varied significantly with the level of depression. Highly depressed older adults disliked heavy robots. These preliminary findings suggest that companion robots need to be designed with careful consideration of their physical characteristics and potential psychological effects.
Keywords: companion robot, older adult, depression
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Literature review
    • Depression of older adults
    • Companion robots for older adults
    • Design of the companion robot
      • Type
      • Weight
      • Material
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Questionnaire
    • Procedure and experimental settings
      • Type
      • Weight
      • Material
      • Statistical analysis
  • Result
    • Type
      • Three-way ANOVA
      • Two-way ANOVA
      • Trend
    • Weight
      • Three-way ANOVA
      • Two-way ANOVA
      • Trend
    • Material
      • Three-way ANOVA
      • Two-way ANOVA
      • Trend
  • Discussion
    • Choosing the variables
    • Results of type test
    • Results of weight test
    • Results of material test
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 18 November 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.18070.oh
References (67)
References
Aarts, S., Peek, S. T. M., & Wouters, E. J. M. (2015). The relation between social network site usage and loneliness and mental health in community-dwelling older adults. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 30(9), 942–949. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Agrawal, S. (2012). Effect of living arrangement on the health status of elderly in India: Findings from a national cross sectional survey. Asian Population Studies, 8(1), 87–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bae, J. N., & Cho, M. J. (2004). Development of the Korean version of the Geriatric Depression Scale and its short form among elderly psychiatric patients. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57(3), 297–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Banks, M. R., Willoughby, L. M., & Banks, W. A. (2008). Animal-assisted therapy and loneliness in nursing Homes: Use of robotic versus living dogs. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 9(3), 173–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beekman, A. T. F., Penninx, B. W. J. H., Deeg, D. J. H., Beurs, E. de, Geerlings, S. W., & Tilburg, W. van. (2002). The impact of depression on the well-being, disability and use of services in older adults: a longitudinal perspective. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 105(1), 20–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bemelmans, R., Gelderblom, G. J., Jonker, P., & de Witte, L. (2015). Effectiveness of robot Paro in intramural psychogeriatric care: A multicenter quasi-experimental study. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 16(11), 946–950. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Penninx, B. W. J. H., Geerlings, S. W., Deeg, D. J. H., van Eijk, J. T. M., van Tilburg, W., Beekman, A. T. F. (1999). Minor and Major Depression and the Risk of Death in Older Persons. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56(10), 889–895. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broekens, Joost, Heerink, Marcel, & Rosendal, H. (2009). Assistive social robots in elderly care: a review. Gerontechnology, 8(2), 94–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brummett, B. H., Barefoot, J. C., Siegler, I. C., & Steffens, D. C. (2000). Relation of subjective and received social support to clinical and self-report assessments of depressive symptoms in an elderly population. Journal of Affective Disorders, 61(1), 41–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byers, A. L., Yaffe, K., Covinsky, K. E., Friedman, M. B., & Bruce, M. L. (2010). High Occurrence of Mood and Anxiety Disorders Among Older Adults: The National Comorbidity Survey ReplicationHigh Mood/Anxiety Disorder Rates in Older Adults. Archives of General Psychiatry, 67(5), 489–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., Hughes, M. E., Waite, L. J., Hawkley, L. C., & Thisted, R. A. (2006). Loneliness as a specific risk factor for depressive symptoms: Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 140–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chi, I., Yip, P. S. F., Chiu, H. F. K., Chou, K. L., Chan, K. S., Kwan, C. W., … Caine, E. (2005). Prevalence of depression and its correlates in Hong Kong’s Chinese older adults. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 13(5), 409–416. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chou, K.-L., & Chi, I. (2000). Comparison between elderly Chinese living alone and those living with others. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 33(4), 51–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eberle, S. G. (2009). Exploring the uncanny valley to find the edge of play. American Journal of Play, 2(2), 167–194.Google Scholar
Etzi, R., Spence, C., & Gallace, A. (2014). Textures that we like to touch: An experimental study of aesthetic preferences for tactile stimuli. Consciousness and Cognition, 291, 178–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 143–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fukunaga, R., Abe, Y., Nakagawa, Y., Koyama, A., Fujise, N., & Ikeda, M. (2012). Living alone is associated with depression among the elderly in a rural community in Japan. Psychogeriatrics, 12(3), 179–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Furuta, Y., Kanoh, M., Shimizu, T., Shimizu, M., & Nakamura, T. (2012). Subjective evaluation of use of Babyloid for doll therapy. In IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (pp. 1–4).Google Scholar
Hacihasanoğlu, R., Yildirim, A., & Karakurt, P. (2012). Loneliness in elderly individuals, level of dependence in activities of daily living (ADL) and influential factors. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 54(1), 61–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heerink, M., Albo-Canals, J., Valenti-Soler, M., Martinez-Martin, P., Zondag, J., Smits, C., & Anisuzzaman, S. (2013). Exploring requirements and alternative pet robots for robot assisted therapy with older adults with dementia. In International Conference on Social Robotics (pp. 104–115). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. (2010). Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: The Almere model. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2(4), 361–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hutson, S., Lim, S. L., Bentley, P. J., Bianchi-Berthouze, N., & Bowling, A. (2011). Investigating the Suitability of Social Robots for the Wellbeing of the Elderly BT – Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction. In S. D’Mello, A. Graesser, B. Schuller, & J.-C. Martin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction – Volume Part I (pp. 578–587). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jongenelis, K., Pot, A. M., Eisses, A. M. H., Beekman, A. T. F., Kluiter, H., & Ribbe, M. W. (2004). Prevalence and risk indicators of depression in elderly nursing home patients: The AGED study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 83(2), 135–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanamori, M., Suzuki, M., & Tanaka, M. (2002). Maintenance and improvement of quality of life among elderly patients using a pet-type robot. Nihon Ronen Igakkai Zasshi. Japanese Journal of Geriatrics, 39(2), 214–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kharicha, K., Iliffe, S., Harari, D., Swift, C., Gillmann, G., & Stuck, A. E. (2007). Health risk appraisal in older people 1: Are older people living alone an ‘at-risk’ group? British Journal of General Practice, 57(537), 271–276.Google Scholar
Kidd, C. D., Taggart, W., & Turkle, S. (2006). A sociable robot to encourage social interaction among the elderly. In Proceedings – IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 3972–3976). IEEE.Google Scholar
Kim, S., & Lee, I. (2016). Components of geriatric nursing robot for Korean elderly: Based on the Focus Group Interview. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 17(10), 527–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kweon, S.-A., Lee, E.-K., & Choi, J.-M. (2004). A comparative study on the subjective fabric hand according to gender for winter sleepwear fabrics. Fibers and Polymers, 5(1), 6–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lazar, A., Thompson, H. J., Piper, A. M., & Demiris, G. (2016). Rethinking the design of robotic pets for older adults. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 1034–1046). ACM.Google Scholar
Lee, H. R., & Sabanović, S. (2014). Culturally variable preferences for robot design and use in South Korea, Turkey, and the United States. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-robot Interaction (pp. 17–24). New York, NY, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
Libin, A. V., & Libin, E. V. (2004). Person-robot interactions from the robopsychologists’ point of view: The robotic psychology and robotherapy approach. Proceedings of the IEEE, 92(11), 1789–1803. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Libin, A., & Libin, E. (2005). Robots Who Care: Robotic Psychology and Robotherapy Approach. In AAAI Fall Symposium: Caring Machines (pp. 67–74).Google Scholar
Lim, L. L., & Kua, E.-H. (2011). Living alone, loneliness, and psychological well-being of older persons in Singapore. Current Gerontology and Geriatrics Research, 2011, 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mitsui, T., Shibata, T., Wada, K., Touda, A., & Tanie, K. (2001). Psychophysiological effects by interaction with mental commit robot. In Proceedings 2001 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. Expanding the Societal Role of Robotics in the the Next Millennium (Cat. No. 01CH37180) (pp. 1189–1194). IEEE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moyle, W., Jones, C., Sung, B., Bramble, M., O’Dwyer, S., Blumenstein, M., & Estivill-Castro, V. (2016). What effect does an animal robot called CuDDler have on the engagement and emotional response of older people with dementia? A pilot feasibility study. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(1), 145–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Odden, M. C., Shlipak, M. G., Whitson, H. E., Katz, R., Kearney, P. M., defilippi, C., … Newman, A. B. (2014). Risk factors for cardiovascular disease across the spectrum of older age: The Cardiovascular Health Study. Atherosclerosis, 237(1), 336–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oh, Y. H., Kim, J., & Ju, D. Y. (2018). Analysis of design elements to enhance acceptance of companion robot in older adults. In RO-MAN 2018 – The 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Workshop on Social Cues in Robot Interaction, Trust and Acceptance. Nanjing, China.Google Scholar
Picard, D., Dacremont, C., Valentin, D., & Giboreau, A. (2003). Perceptual dimensions of tactile textures. Acta Psychologica, 114(2), 165–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pino, M., Boulay, M., Jouen, F., & Rigaud, A. (2015). “Are we ready for robots that care for us?” Attitudes and opinions of older adults toward socially assistive robots. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 7, 141.Google Scholar
Prakash, A., & Rogers, W. A. (2015). Why Some Humanoid Faces Are Perceived More Positively Than Others: Effects of Human-Likeness and Task. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(2), 309–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Preuß, D., & Legal, F. (2017). Living with the animals: Animal or robotic companions for the elderly in smart homes? Journal of Medical Ethics, 43(6), 407–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, H., MacDonald, B., Kerse, N., & Broadbent, E. (2013). The psychosocial effects of a companion robot: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 14(9), 661–667. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scholten, T. S., Vissenberg, C., & Heerink, M. (2016). Hygiene and the use of robotic animals in hospitals: A review of the literature. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(4), 499–511. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheikh, J. I., & Yesavage, J. A. (1986). Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent evidence and development of a shorter version. Clinical Gerontologist: The Journal of Aging and Mental Health, 5(1–2), 165–173.Google Scholar
Shibata, T. (2012). Therapeutic seal robot as biofeedback medical device: Qualitative and quantitative evaluations of robot therapy in dementia care. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100(8), 2527–2538. IEEE.Google Scholar
Shibata, T., Kawaguchi, Y., & Wada, K. (2009). Investigation on people living with Paro at home. In RO-MAN 2009 – The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 1131–1136). IEEE.Google Scholar
(2012). Investigation on people living with seal robot at home. International Journal of Social Robotics, 4(1), 53–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shibata, T., Wada, K., Saito, T., & Tanie, K. (2005). Human interactive robot for psychological enrichment and therapy. In Proc. AISB (Vol. 51, pp. 98–109).Google Scholar
Shishehgar, M., Kerr, D., & Blake, J. (2018). A systematic review of research into how robotic technology can help older people. Smart Health, 7–81, 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skeleton, D. A., Greig, C. A., Davies, J. M., & Young, A. (1994). Strength, power and related functional ability of healthy people aged 65–89 years. Age and Ageing, 23(5), 371–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smarr, C.-A., Fausset, C. B., & Rogers, W. A. (2010). Understanding the Potential for Robot Assistance for Older Adults in the Home Environment. Georgia Inst. of Technology (Vol. 01701). Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Stiehl, W. D., Lieberman, J., Breazeal, C., Basel, L., Lalla, L. L., & Wolf, M. (2005). The Design of the Huggable: A Terrestrial Robotic Companion for Relational, Affective Touch. In AAAI Fall Symposium: Carrying Machines (pp. 91–98).Google Scholar
Stiehl, W. D., Lee, J. K., Breazeal, C., Nalin, M., Morandi, A., & Sanna, A. (2009). The Huggable: A Platform for Research in Robotic Companions for Pediatric Care. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 317–320). New York, NY, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
Stiehl, W. D., Lee, J. K., Toscano, R. L., & Breazeal, C. (2008). The Huggable: A platform for research in robotic companions for eldercare. In AAAI Fall Symposium: AI in Eldercare: New Solutions to Old Problems (pp. 109–115).Google Scholar
Tamura, T., Yonemitsu, S., Itoh, A., Oikawa, D., Kawakami, A., Higashi, Y., … Nakajima, K. (2004). Is an entertainment robot useful in the care of elderly people with severe dementia? The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, 59(1), M83–M85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thieulin, C., Pailler-Mattei, C., Vargiolu, R., Lancelot, S., & Zahouani, H. (2017). Study of the tactile perception of bathroom tissues: Comparison between the sensory evaluation by a handfeel panel and a tribo-acoustic artificial finger. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 1501, 417–425. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toepoel, V. (2013). Ageing, Leisure, and Social Connectedness: How could Leisure Help Reduce Social Isolation of Older People? Social Indicators Research, 113(1), 355–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomczak, M., & Tomczak, E. (2014). The need to report effect size estimates revisited. An overview of some recommended measures of effect size. Trends in Sport Sciences, 21(1), 19–25.Google Scholar
Wada, K., & Shibata, T. (2007). Robot therapy in a care house – Change of relationship among the residents and seal robot during a 2-month long study. In RO-MAN 2007 – The 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 107–112). IEEE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Social and physiological influences of robot therapy in a care house. Interaction Studies, 9(2), 258–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wada, K., Shibata, T., & Kawaguchi, Y. (2009). Long-term robot therapy in a health service facility for the aged – A case study for 5 years -. In 2009 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (pp. 930–933). IEEE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wada, T., Ishine, M., Sakagami, T., Okumiya, K., Fujisawa, M., Murakami, S., … Matsubayashi, K. (2004). Depression in Japanese community-dwelling elderly – Prevalence and association with ADL and QOL. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 39(1), 15–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webber, L. J., Stubbs, S., Stark, J., Trew, G. H., Margara, R., Hardy, K., & Franks, S. (2003). Formation and early development of follicles in the polycystic ovary. The Lancet, 362(9389), 1017–1021. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, C. (1999). The Chihuahua. Minnesota, MN: Capstone Press.Google Scholar
Wu, Y.-H., Fassert, C., & Rigaud, A.-S. (2012). Designing robots for the elderly: Appearance issue and beyond. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 54(1), 121–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xavier, F. M., Ferraza, M. P., Argimon, I., Trentini, C. M., Poyares, D., Bertollucci, P. H., … & Moriguchi, E. H. (2002). The DSM-IV ‘minor depression’ disorder in the oldest-old: prevalence rate, sleep patterns, memory function and quality of life in elderly people of Italian descent in Southern Brazil. International journal of geriatric psychiatry, 17(2), 107–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zizza, C. A., Ellison, K. J., & Wernette, C. M. (2009). Total water intakes of community-living middle-old and oldest-old adults. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical Sciences, 64(4), 481–486. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Green, Matthew, Dzung Dao & Wendy Moyle
2024. Design Attributes of Socially Assistive Robots for People with Dementia: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Social Robotics 16:2 ► pp. 415 ff. DOI logo
Kwon, Ju Yeong & Da Young Ju
2023. Living Lab-Based Service Interaction Design for a Companion Robot for Seniors in South Korea. Biomimetics 8:8 ► pp. 609 ff. DOI logo
Sun, Wei
2022. The research and implementation feasibility analysis of an intelligent robot for simulating navigational English dialogue under the background of artificial intelligence. Computer Science and Information Systems 19:3 ► pp. 1533 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Xinmin, Ying Hu, Wendi Zhang & Juan Vicente Capella Hernandez
2022. Usability Design of Human-Machine Interaction Interface of Child Companion Robot in Wireless Network. Scientific Programming 2022 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Oh, Young Hoon & Da Young Ju
2020. Age-Related Differences in Fixation Pattern on a Companion Robot. Sensors 20:13 ► pp. 3807 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.