Child-Robot Relationship Formation: A Narrative Review of Empirical Research.
Artificial intelligence
Automation
Child–robot interaction
Human–robot interaction
New-ontological-category hypothesis
Journal
International journal of social robotics
ISSN: 1875-4791
Titre abrégé: Int J Soc Robot
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101622429
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
accepted:
07
06
2019
entrez:
27
5
2020
pubmed:
27
5
2020
medline:
27
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This narrative review aimed to elucidate which robot-related characteristics predict relationship formation between typically-developing children and social robots in terms of closeness and trust. Moreover, we wanted to know to what extent relationship formation can be explained by children's experiential and cognitive states during interaction with a robot. We reviewed 86 journal articles and conference proceedings published between 2000 and 2017. In terms of predictors, robots' responsiveness and role, as well as strategic and emotional interaction between robot and child, increased closeness between the child and the robot. Findings about whether robot features predict children's trust in robots were inconsistent. In terms of children's experiential and cognitive states during interaction with a robot, robot characteristics and interaction styles were associated with two experiential states: engagement and enjoyment/liking. The literature hardly addressed the impact of experiential and cognitive states on closeness and trust. Comparisons of children's interactions with robots, adults, and objects showed that robots are perceived as neither animate nor inanimate, and that they are entities with whom children will likely form social relationships. Younger children experienced more enjoyment, were less sensitive to a robot's interaction style, and were more prone to anthropomorphic tendencies and effects than older children. Tailoring a robot's sex to that of a child mainly appealed to boys.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32454901
doi: 10.1007/s12369-019-00569-0
pii: 569
pmc: PMC7235061
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
325-344Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2019.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interestThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Références
Front Hum Neurosci. 2017 Jun 07;11:295
pubmed: 28638330
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e59448
pubmed: 23533625
Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2009 Feb 1;18(1):16
pubmed: 20157637
Top Cogn Sci. 2016 Apr;8(2):481-91
pubmed: 26945492
Annu Rev Psychol. 2017 Jan 3;68:383-411
pubmed: 27618945
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2007 Apr 29;362(1480):679-704
pubmed: 17301026
Vaccine. 2013 Jun 7;31(25):2772-7
pubmed: 23623861
J Autism Dev Disord. 2013 May;43(5):1038-49
pubmed: 23111617
Dev Psychol. 2012 Mar;48(2):303-14
pubmed: 22369338
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Nov 13;104(46):17954-8
pubmed: 17984068
Psychol Psychother. 2003 Jun;76(Pt 2):133-44
pubmed: 12855060
Annu Rev Psychol. 2017 Jan 3;68:627-652
pubmed: 27648986
Trends Cogn Sci. 2015 Mar;19(3):109-11
pubmed: 25563822
J Pers. 1967 Dec;35(4):651-65
pubmed: 4865583
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2016 Feb;11(2):103-116
pubmed: 26330097
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Aug;92(2):174-81
pubmed: 23684366