“Are we ready for robots that care for us?” Attitudes and opinions of older adults toward socially assistive robots

Abstract

Socially Assistive Robots (SAR) may help improve care delivery at home for older adults with cognitive impairment and reduce the burden of informal caregivers. Examining the views of these stakeholders on SAR is fundamental in order to conceive acceptable and useful SAR for dementia care. This study investigated SAR acceptance among three groups of older adults living in the community: persons with Mild Cognitive Impairment, informal caregivers of persons with dementia, and healthy older adults. Different technology acceptance questions related to the robot and user characteristics, potential applications, feelings about technology, ethical issues, and barriers and facilitators for SAR adoption, were addressed in a mixed-method study. Participants (n = 25) completed a survey and took part in a focus group (n = 7). A functional robot prototype, a multimedia presentation, and some use-case scenarios provided a base for the discussion. Content analysis was carried out based on recorded material from focus groups. Results indicated that an accurate insight of influential factors for SAR acceptance could be gained by combining quantitative and qualitative methods. Participants acknowledged the potential benefits of SAR for supporting care at home for individuals with cognitive impairment. In all the three groups, intention to use SAR was found to be lower for the present time than that anticipated for the future. However, caregivers and persons with MCI had a higher perceived usefulness and intention to use SAR, at the present time, than healthy older adults, confirming that current needs are strongly related to technology acceptance and should influence SAR design. A key theme that emerged in this study was the importance of customizing SAR appearance, services, and social capabilities. Mismatch between needs and solutions offered by the robot, usability factors, and lack of experience with technology, were seen as the most important barriers for SAR adoption.

What People with Dementia Want: Designing MARIO an Acceptable Robot Companion

“…A mismatch between needs and the solutions offered by robots are a barrier to acceptance and robot adoption [20]. Hawkey et al (2005) found carers and PWD disagreed as to what they wanted from a robotic device designed to help deal with repeated questioning.…”

“…In order to be accepted, social robots need to be perceived by users as useful and relevant to their current unmet needs [18,19,20,21,22]. A mismatch between needs and the solutions offered by robots are a barrier to acceptance and robot adoption [20].…”

“…Some carer relatives consider PWD will not be able to use robots due to their cognitive deficits [20,26]. Kerssens et al (2015) conducted a small study with PWD (n=7) and their life partner carers to test the feasibility and acceptability of using Companion, a touch screen technology to deliver psychosocial interventions.…”

State Of The Art: A Study of Human-Robot Interaction in Healthcare

“…Conversely, a study carried out by Hayley et al [3] showed that users were enthusiastic and had positive attitude towards the use of Paro because the users believed that Paro was beautiful looking, life-like, tactile and had lovely eyes. [53] emphasized that hyper-realistic representations of robots with human appearance could lead persons with dementia to confusion. Hence, the use of such robots in the provision of therapy for patients is a challenge.…”

Characteristics of a Transactive Phenomenon in Relationships among Older Adults with Dementia, Nurses as Intermediaries, and Communication Robot

“…Nevertheless, two issues were realized regarding living with a human-type communication robot as a strategy; to improve cognitive functions and prevent cognitive decline in the elderly [12]. With robot therapy, it was found that only a few aspects of its capabilities, when examined closely, were effects derived from the viewpoints of nursing practices and human care [13] [14]. In this regard, robot therapy has not been generalized, and more descriptions and discussions about its practical utility are required.…”