More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Open access

Results of Field Trials with a Mobile Service Robot for Older Adults in 16 Private Households

ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI), Volume 9, Issue 2

Article No.: 10, Pages 1 - 27

https://doi.org/10.1145/3368554

Published: 16 December 2019 Publication History

All formats PDF

Abstract

In this article, we present results obtained from field trials with the Hobbit robotic platform, an assistive, social service robot aiming at enabling prolonged independent living of older adults in their own homes. Our main contribution lies within the detailed results on perceived safety, usability, and acceptance from field trials with autonomous robots in real homes of older users. In these field trials, we studied how 16 older adults (75 plus) lived with autonomously interacting service robots over multiple weeks.

Robots have been employed for periods of months previously in home environments for older people, and some have been tested with manipulation abilities, but this is the first time a study has tested a robot in private homes that provided the combination of manipulation abilities, autonomous navigation, and non-scheduled interaction for an extended period of time. This article aims to explore how older adults interact with such a robot in their private homes. Our results show that all users interacted with Hobbit daily, rated most functions as well working, and reported that they believe that Hobbit will be part of future elderly care. We show that Hobbit’s adaptive behavior approach towards the user increasingly eased the interaction between the users and the robot. Our trials reveal the necessity to move into actual users’ homes, as only there, we encounter real-world challenges and demonstrate issues such as misinterpretation of actions during non-scripted human-robot interaction.

Supplementary Material

a10-bajones-apndx.pdf (bajones.zip)

Supplemental movie, appendix, image and software files for, Results of Field Trials with a Mobile Service Robot for Older Adults in 16 Private Households

Download
85.76 KB

References

[1]

Aitor Aldoma, Federico Tombari, Luigi Di Stefano, and Markus Vincze. 2012. A global hypotheses verification method for 3d object recognition. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 511--524.

Digital Library

[2]

Markus Bajones, David Fischinger, Astrid Weiss, Daniel Wolf, Markus Vincze, Paloma de la Puente, Tobias Körtner, Markus Weninger, Konstantinos Papoutsakis, Damien Michel, Ammar Qammaz, Paschalis Panteleris, Michalis Foukarakis, Ilia Adami, Danai Ioannidi, Asterios Leonidis, Margherita Antona, Antonis Argyros, Peter Mayer, Paul Panek, Håkan Eftring, and Susanne Frennert. 2018. Hobbit: Providing fall detection and prevention for the elderly in the real world. J. Robot. 2018 (2018).

[3]

Markus Bajones, Astrid Weiss, and Markus Vincze. 2016. I know what you did last week. Log data analysis of long term household trials. In Proceedings of the Workshop on “The Challenge (Not) to Go Wild&excl; Challenges and Best Practices to Study HRI in Natural Interaction Settings” at HRI’16.

[4]

Jenay M. Beer, Cory-ann Smarr, Tiffany L. Chen, Akanksha Prakash, Tracy L. Mitzner, Charles C. Kemp, and Wendy A. Rogers. 2012. The domesticated robot: Design guidelines for assisting older adults to age in place. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’12). 335--342.

[5]

Elizabeth Broadbent, Jeff Garrett, Nicola Jepsen, Vickie Li Ogilvie, Ho Seok Ahn, Hayley Robinson, Kathryn Peri, Ngaire Kerse, Paul Rouse, Avinesh Pillai et al. 2018. Using robots at home to support patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Pilot randomized controlled trial. J. Med. Internet Res. 20, 2 (2018).

[6]

Elizabeth Broadbent, Ngaire Kerse, Kathryn Peri, Hayley Robinson, Chandimal Jayawardena, Tony Kuo, Chandan Datta, Rebecca Stafford, Haley Butler, Pratyusha Jawalkar et al. 2016. Benefits and problems of health-care robots in aged care settings: A comparison trial. Australasian J. Age. 35, 1 (2016), 23--29.

[7]

Paolo Dario, Eugenio Guglielmelli, Vincenzo Genovese, and Maurizio Toro. 1996. Robot assistants: Applications and evolution. Robot. Auton. Syst. 18, 1--2 (1996), 225--234.

[8]

Kerstin Dautenhahn. 2007. Methodology 8 themes of human-robot interaction: A growing research field. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 4, 1 SPEC. ISS. (2007), 103--108.

[9]

Paloma de la Puente, Markus Bajones, Christian Reuther, Daniel Wolf, David Fischinger, and Markus Vincze. 2019. Robot navigation in domestic environments: Experiences using RGB-D sensors in real homes. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 94, 2 (2019), 455--470.

Digital Library

[10]

Andrew Dillon. 2001. User acceptance of information technology. Encyclopedia of Human Factors and Ergonomics. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105880 http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/handle/10150/105880.

[11]

R. Eisma, A. Dickinson, J. Goodman, A. Syme, L. Tiwari, and A. F. Newell. 2004. Early user involvement in the development of information technology-related products for older people. Univ. Access Inform. Soc. 3, 2 (2004), 131--140.

Digital Library

[12]

Gabor Fazekas, Andras Toth, Pierre Rumeau, Katalin Zsiga, Tamas Pilissy, and Vincent Dupurque. 2012. Cognitive-care robot for elderly assistance: Preliminary results of tests with users in their homes. In Proceedings of the AAL Forum. 145--148.

[13]

Heike Felzmann, Kathy Murphy, Dympna Casey, and Oya Beyan. 2015. Robot-assisted care for elderly with dementia: Is there a potential for genuine end-user empowerment. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human--Robot Interaction.

[14]

David Fischinger, Peter Einramhof, Konstantinos Papoutsakis, Walter Wohlkinger, Peter Mayer, Paul Panek, Stefan Hofmann, Tobias Körtner, Astrid Weiss, Antonis Argyros, and Markus Vincze. 2016. Hobbit, a care robot supporting independent living at home: First prototype and lessons learned. Robot. Auton. Syst. 75 (2016), 60--78.

Digital Library

[15]

David Fischinger, Astrid Weiss, and Markus Vincze. 2015. Learning grasps with topographic features. Int. J. Robot. Res. 34, 9 (2015), 1167--1194.

Digital Library

[16]

Jodi Forlizzi and Carl Disalvo. 2006. Service robots in the domestic environment: A study of the Roomba vacuum in the home. Design 2006 (2006), 258--265.

[17]

Birgit Graf, Ulrich Reiser, Martin Hägele, Kathrin Mauz, and Peter Klein. 2009. Robotic home assistant Care-O-Bot® 3—Product vision and innovation platform. In Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and Its Social Impacts (ARSO’09). 139--144.

Digital Library

[18]

Horst-Michael Gross, Steffen Mueller, Christof Schroeter, Michael Volkhardt, Andrea Scheidig, Klaus Debes, Katja Richter, and Nicola Doering. 2015. Robot companion for domestic health assistance: Implementation, test and case study under everyday conditions in private apartments. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS’15). 5992--5999.

[19]

Chandimal Jayawardena, I-Han Kuo, Elizabeth Broadbent, and Bruce A. MacDonald. 2016. Socially assistive robot healthbot: Design, implementation, and field trials. IEEE Syst. J. 10, 3 (2016), 1056--1067.

[20]

Takayuki Kanda, Masahiro Shiomi, Zenta Miyashita, Hiroshi Ishiguro, and Norihiro Hagita. 2009. An affective guide robot in a shopping mall. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (HRI’09). ACM, New York, NY, 173--180.

Digital Library

[21]

Tobias Körtner, Alexandra Schmid, Daliah Batko-Klein, Christoph Gisinger, Andreas Huber, Lara Lammer, and Markus Vincze. 2012. How social robots make older users really feel well—A method to assess users’ concepts of a social robotic assistant. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 138--147.

Digital Library

[22]

I-Han Kuo, Elizabeth Broadbent, and Bruce MacDonald. 2008. Designing a robotic assistant for healthcare applications. In Proceedings of the 7th Conference of Health Informatics.

[23]

Lara Lammer, Andreas Huber, Astrid Weiss, and Markus Vincze. 2014. Mutual care: How older adults react when they should help their care robot. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on New Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction. Retrieved from http://hobbit.acin.tuwien.ac.at/publications/AISB2014-HRIpaper.pdf.

[24]

Iolanda Leite, Carlos Martinho, and Ana Paiva. 2013. Social robots for long-term interaction: A survey. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 5, 2 (2013), 291--308.

[25]

J. C. Marquié, L. Jourdan-Boddaert, and N. Huet. 2002. Do older adults underestimate their actual computer knowledge?Behav. Inform. Technol. 21, 4 (2002), 273--280.

[26]

Tatsuya Nomura, Tomohiro Suzuki, Takayuki Kanda, and Kensuke Kato. 2006. Measurement of negative attitudes toward robots. Interact. Stud. 7, 3 (2006), 437--454.

[27]

Martha E. Pollack, Laura Brown, Dirk Colbry, Cheryl Orosz, Bart Peintner, Sailesh Ramakrishnan, Sandra Engberg, Judith T. Matthews, Jacqueline Dunbar-Jacob, Colleen E. McCarthy et al. 2002. Pearl: A mobile robotic assistant for the elderly. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Automation as Eldercare, Vol. 2002. 85--91.

[28]

Johann Prankl, Aitor Aldoma Buchaca, Alexander Svejda, and Markus Vincze. 2015. RGB-D object modelling for object recognition and tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS’15). 8.

[29]

Tobias Rehrl, Raphaël Troncy, Andreas Bley, Susanne Ihsen, Katharina Scheibl, Sebastian Glende, Stefan Goetze, Jens Kessler, Christoph Hintermueller, and Frank Wallhoff. 2012. The ambient adaptable living assistant is meeting its users. In Proceedings of the AAL Forum. 629--636.

[30]

Yvonne Rogers. 2011. Interaction design gone wild. Interactions 18, 4 (July 2011), 58.

Digital Library

[31]

Astrid Marieke Rosenthal-von der Pütten, Astrid Weiss, and Selma Šabanović. 2016. The challenge (not) to go wild&excl;: Challenges and best practices to study HRI in natural interaction settings. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (HRI’16). IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, 583--584. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2906831.2906991.

[32]

Selma Sabanovic, Marek P. Michalowski, and Reid Simmons. 2006. Robots in the wild: Observing human-robot social interaction outside the lab. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control (AMC’06), Vol. 2006. 576--581.

[33]

Ch. Schroeter, S. Mueller, M. Volkhardt, E. Einhorn, C. Huijnen, H. Van Den Heuvel, A. Van Berlo, A. Bley, and H. M. Gross. 2013. Realization and user evaluation of a companion robot for people with mild cognitive impairments. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 1153--1159.

[34]

Ralf Schwarzer and Matthias Jerusalem. 1995. Generalized self-efficacy scale. In Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs. Number 2008. Elsevier Publishers, 35--37.

[35]

T. Shibata and K. Tanie. 2001. Physical and affective interaction between human and mental commit robot. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA’01), Vol. 3. 2572--2577.

[36]

Masahiro Shiomi, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, and Norihiro Hagita. 2006. Interactive humanoid robots for a science museum. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human--Robot Interaction (HRI’06). ACM, New York, NY, 305--312.

Digital Library

[37]

Cory-Ann Smarr, Akanksha Prakash, Jenay M. Beer, Tracy L. Mitzner, Charles C. Kemp, and Wendy A. Rogers. 2012. Older adults’ preferences for and acceptance of robot assistance for everyday living tasks. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Meeting, Vol. 56. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA, 153--157.

[38]

Walter Dan Stiehl, Cynthia Breazeal, Kuk-Hyun Han, Jeff Lieberman, Levi Lalla, Allan Maymin, Jonathan Salinas, Daniel Fuentes, Robert Toscano, Cheng Hau Tong, et al. 2006. The huggable: A therapeutic robotic companion for relational, affective touch. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Conference on Emerging Technologies. ACM, 15.

Digital Library

[39]

Jayoung Sung, Rebecca E. Grinter, and Henrik I. Christensen. 2009. “Pimp My Roomba”: Designing for personalization. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems1 (2009), 193--196.

[40]

Markus Vincze, Markus Bajones, Markus Suchi, Daniel Wolf, Astrid Weiss, David Fischinger, and Paloma da la Puente. 2016. Learning and detecting objects with a mobile robot to assist older adults in their homes. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 316--330.

[41]

K. Wada and T. Shibata. 2007. Living with seal robots—Its sociopsychological and physiological influences on the elderly at a care house. IEEE Trans. Robot. 23, 5 (Oct. 2007), 972--980.

Digital Library

[42]

K. Wada, T. Shibata, T. Saito, K. Sakamoto, and K. Tanie. 2005. Psychological and social effects of one year robot assisted activity on elderly people at a health service facility for the aged. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2785--2790.

[43]

K. Wada, T. Shibata, T. Saito, and K. Tanie. 2004. Effects of robot-assisted activity for elderly people and nurses at a day service center. Proc. IEEE 92, 11 (Nov. 2004), 1780--1788.

[44]

Astrid Weiss, Lara Lammer, Andreas Huber, Markus Vincze, Nina Hess, Tobias Körtner, and Alexandra Schmid. 2014. Developing an assistive robot for older adults: Methodological considerations for field trials. In Proceedings of the Workshop on “Socially Assistive Robots for the Elderly: Are We Trapped in Stereotypes?” at HRI’14.

[45]

Lucy Yardley, Nina Beyer, Klaus Hauer, Gertrudis Kempen, Chantal Piot-Ziegler, and Chris Todd. 2005. Development and initial validation of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I). Age and Ageing 34, 6 (2005), 614--619.

[46]

Katalin Zsiga, András Tóth, Tamás Pilissy, Orsolya Péter, Zoltán Dénes, and Gábor Fazekas. 2018. Evaluation of a companion robot based on field tests with single older adults in their homes. Assist. Technol. 30, 5 (2018), 259--266.

Cited By

Rehm MKrummheuer A(2024)When a notification at the right time is not enough: the reminding process for socially assistive robots in institutional careFrontiers in Robotics and AI10.3389/frobt.2024.136943811Online publication date: 1-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2024.1369438
Lee OYun JPark D(2024)Perceptions and experiences of Korean American older adults with companion robots through long-term use: a comparative analysis of robot retention vs. returnFrontiers in Public Health10.3389/fpubh.2024.142412312Online publication date: 18-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1424123
de la Puente PVincze MGuffanti DGalan D(2024)Editorial: Assistive and service robots for health and home applications (RH3 - Robot Helpers in Health and Home)Frontiers in Neurorobotics10.3389/fnbot.2024.150303818Online publication date: 29-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2024.1503038
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Results of Field Trials with a Mobile Service Robot for Older Adults in 16 Private Households

Recommendations

The domesticated robot: design guidelines for assisting older adults to age in place
HRI '12: Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Many older adults wish to remain in their own homes as they age [16]. However, challenges in performing home upkeep tasks threaten an older adult's ability to age in place. Even healthy independently living older adults experience challenges in ...
Results of a Real World Trial with a Mobile Social Service Robot for Older Adults
HRI '16: The Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction

Robots are an increasingly discussed solution for assistance of seniors. Importance of testing natural interaction therefore becomes crucial. This paper presents first results of a study with an autonomous mobile social service robot prototype that was ...
Evaluating older adults' interaction with a mobile assistive robot
2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)
This paper presents findings from two deployments of an autonomous mobile robot in older adult low income Supportive Apartment Living (SAL) facilities. Design guidelines for the robot hardware and software were based on query of clinicians, caregivers and ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction

ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction Volume 9, Issue 2

June 2020

164 pages

EISSN:2573-9522

DOI:10.1145/3375991

Editors:
Odest Chadwicke Jenkins
University of Michigan, USA
,
Selma Sabanovic
Indiana University, USA

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2019 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 16 December 2019

Accepted: 01 September 2019

Revised: 01 August 2019

Received: 01 November 2017

Published in THRI Volume 9, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Funding Sources

European Community's Seventh Framework Programme
HOBBIT

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

40
Total Citations
View Citations
2,561
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)444
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)69

Reflects downloads up to 11 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Rehm MKrummheuer A(2024)When a notification at the right time is not enough: the reminding process for socially assistive robots in institutional careFrontiers in Robotics and AI10.3389/frobt.2024.136943811Online publication date: 1-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2024.1369438
Lee OYun JPark D(2024)Perceptions and experiences of Korean American older adults with companion robots through long-term use: a comparative analysis of robot retention vs. returnFrontiers in Public Health10.3389/fpubh.2024.142412312Online publication date: 18-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1424123
de la Puente PVincze MGuffanti DGalan D(2024)Editorial: Assistive and service robots for health and home applications (RH3 - Robot Helpers in Health and Home)Frontiers in Neurorobotics10.3389/fnbot.2024.150303818Online publication date: 29-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2024.1503038
Dotch EMavrovounioti ADu WAnkrah EJohnson JMin AHayes G(2024)Accessibility through Awareness of Noise Sensitivity Management and Regulation PracticesProceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3663548.3675630(1-12)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3663548.3675630
Neef CRichert AGrollman DBroadbent EJu WSoh HWilliams T(2024)Aging with Agency: Real-World Insights into Robot-Assisted Self-Health Monitoring for Older AdultsCompanion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610978.3640561(784-788)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610978.3640561
Tsertsidis AMbiydzenyuy G(2024)Occupational therapists’ perspectives on welfare technologies for dementia: exploring recommendation frequencies – a pilot studyDisability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology10.1080/17483107.2024.2412785(1-12)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2412785
Tsertsidis ARapado I(2024)Examining the availability of information on welfare technologies for people living with dementia in Sweden – a scoping reviewDisability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology10.1080/17483107.2024.2392856(1-11)Online publication date: 20-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2392856
Mohan MNunez CKuchenbecker K(2024)Closing the loop in minimally supervised human–robot interaction: formative and summative feedbackScientific Reports10.1038/s41598-024-60905-x14:1Online publication date: 8-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60905-x
Karami VYaffe MGore GMoon AAbbasgholizadeh Rahimi S(2024)Socially Assistive Robots for patients with Alzheimer's Disease: A scoping reviewArchives of Gerontology and Geriatrics10.1016/j.archger.2024.105409123(105409)Online publication date: Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2024.105409
Tsujikawa STsutsui HHonda Y(2024)Development and application of a communication robot to improve the emotional state of elderly living aloneUniversal Access in the Information Society10.1007/s10209-023-01007-923:4(1979-1986)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10209-023-01007-9
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents