Social Robots vs. Computer Display: Does the Way Social Stories are Delivered Make a Difference for Their Effectiveness on ASD Children?

Abstract

Background and Objectives:The aim of this exploratory study is to test whether social stories presented by a social robot have a greater effect than ones presented on a computer display in increasing the independency in expressing social abilities of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Although much progress has been made in developing interventions to improve social skills of children with ASD, a number of unresolved problems still remain. Social robots received increased attention as assisting tools for improving social skills on children with ASD. Methods: Twenty children with ASD (age between 4 and 9 years old) were randomly allocated to three groups: control group (n = 7), computer-presented social stories (n = 6), and robot assisted therapy (n = 7). Results: Overall, our data indicate that using the social robot to implement social story intervention was more effective for improving the independency of expressing social abilities for the participants, than the computer screen. Limitations: Future studies should include a bigger sample size, more intervention sessions, and a follow-up session in order to see if the effect persists in time. Conclusions: The preliminary outcomes of this exploratory research provide empirical bases for further investigations regarding the effectiveness of robot assisted therapy in improving social skills for children with autism through future randomized clinical trials.

Poor Thing! Would You Feel Sorry for a Simulated Robot?

“…Another angle of research is to compare physical robots with onscreen agents, for example, showing that people may perceive agent emotions similarly between the two [5], people may engage more with a robot than a text-based computer [26], may speak differently to an on-screen agent or enjoy interacting with it less than to robot [12,22], or that there are unique trade-offs between the approaches that should be considered more deeply [36]. This body of work provides insight into the more general robot versus screen agent question, and motivates the need to investigate embodiment.…”

Robotics Agent Coacher for CP motor Function (RAC CP Fun)

“…Currently, the main populations where SAR is used are the elderly, patients with dementia and cognitive/motor disorders, 22,23 and children with autism. [24][25][26][27][28][29] Unlike computer technology-based treatment, e.g., video instruction 30 and virtual peers using the Internet, 31 SAR not only provides the opportunity to learn from a nonthreatening, three-dimensional inanimate object, it also presents the opportunity to learn through interaction, thus encouraging autonomous social behavior.…”

A Participatory Design Process of a Robotic Tutor of Assistive Sign Language for Children with Autism

“…Broad research has been conducted to explore robots as tools in communication therapy for autistic children [5], [6], [7], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [10], [16], [17], [4], [18], and separately to teach sign language to neurotypical children [19], [20]. Combining these two elements serves as the motivation to conduct this research.…”

“…1) Simple form [6], [7], [33], [11], [1], [12], [34], [4], [10] 2) Consistent, structured, simple behavior [30], [6], [7], [35], [33], [11], [1], [12], [14], [15], [10], [34] 3) Positive, supportive, rewarding experience and environment [5], [6], [7], [36], [12], [25], [15], [10], [37], [16], [17], [34], [18] 4) Modular complexity [5], [35], [38], [33], [11], [12], [16], [34], [4], [2] 5) Modularity specific to child's preferences [33], [38], [12], [34], [2] The five design guidelines defined in this section can be used to guide the design of robots for use by children with ASD in general. While the des...…”