Recently, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the related social distancing measures, in-person activities have been significantly reduced to limit the spread of the virus, especially in healthcare settings. This has led to loneliness and social isolation for our most vulnerable populations. Socially assistive robots can play a crucial role in minimizing these negative affects. Namely, socially assistive robots can provide assistance with activities of daily living, and through cognitive and physical stimulation. The ongoing pandemic has also accelerated the exploration of remote presence ranging from workplaces to home and healthcare environments. Human-robot interaction (HRI) researchers have also explored the use of remote HRI to provide cognitive assistance in healthcare settings. Existing in-person and remote comparison studies have investigated the feasibility of these types of HRI on individual scenarios and tasks. However, no consensus on the specific differences between in-person HRI and remote HRI has been determined. Furthermore, to date, the exact outcomes for in-person HRI versus remote HRI both with a physical socially assistive robot have not been extensively compared and their influence on physical embodiment in remote conditions has not been addressed. In this paper, we investigate and compare in-person HRI versus remote HRI for robots that assist people with activities of daily living and cognitive interventions. We present the first comprehensive investigation and meta-analysis of these two types of robotic presence to determine how they influence HRI outcomes and impact user tasks. In particular, we address research questions regarding experience, perceptions and attitudes, and the efficacy of both humanoid and non-humanoid socially assistive robots with different populations and interaction modes. The use of remote HRI to provide assistance with daily activities and interventions is a promising emerging field for healthcare applications. 

/pdf/a-meta-analysis-on-remote-hri-and-in-person-hri-what-is-a-vlx4rrdv.pdf

A Meta-Analysis on Remote HRI and In-Person HRI: What Is a Socially Assistive Robot to Do?

Education systems are currently in a state of uncertainty in the face of the changes and complexities that have accompanied SARS-CoV2, leading to new directions in educational models and curricular reforms. Video-based Intervention (VBIs) is a form of observational learning based on social learning theory. Thus, this study aims to make use of a humanoid robot called NAO, which has been used in educational interventions for children with autism spectrum disorder. Integrating it in video-based interventions. This study aims to characterize, in an everyday context, the mediating role of the NAO robot presented in group videoconferences to stimulate video-based on observational learning for children with cognitive and social communication deficits. The children in the study demonstrated a minimal ability to understand simple instructions. This qualitative study was applied to three children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), level III special education students at Center for Special Basic Education (CEBE) in the city of Arequipa, Peru. Likewise, an instrument was designed for assessment of the VBIs by a group of psychologists. The results showed that the presence of the NAO robot in the VBIs successfully stimulated their interaction capabilities.

Maria Elena Rojas Zegarra

Papers

Exploring the Effect of Robot-Based Video Interventions for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder as an Alternative to Remote Education