Acknowledging the benefits of active learning and the importance of collaboration skills, the higher education system has started to transform toward utilization of group activities into lecture hall culture. In this study, a novel interaction has been introduced, wherein a social robot facilitated a small collaborative group activity of students in higher education. Thirty-six students completed a 3 h activity that covered the main content of a course in Human Computer Interaction. In this within-subject study, the students worked in groups of four on three activities, moving between three conditions: instructor facilitation of several groups using pen and paper for the activity; tablets facilitation, also used for the activity; and robot facilitation, using tablets for the activity. The robot facilitated the activity by introducing the different tasks, ensuring proper time management, and encouraging discussion among the students. This study examined the effects of facilitation type on attitudes toward the activity facilitation, the group activity, and the robot, using quantitative, and qualitative measures. Overall students perceived the robot positively, as friendly and responsive, even though the robot did not directly respond to the students' verbal communications. While most survey items did not convey significant differences between the robot, tablet, or instructor, we found significant correlations between perceptions of the robot, and attitudes toward the activity facilitation, and the group activity. Qualitative data revealed the drawbacks and benefits of the robot, as well as its relative perceived advantages over a human facilitator, such as better time management, objectivity, and efficiency. These results suggest that the robot's complementary characteristics enable a higher quality learning environment, that corresponds with students' requirements and that a Robot Supportive Collaborative Learning (RSCL) is a promising novel paradigm for higher education.

No abstract

Socially assistive robots (SARs) have been proposed to assist post-stroke patients in performing their exercise during their rehabilitation process, with the trust in the robot identified as an important factor in human–robot interaction. In the current study, we aimed to identify and characterize factors that influence post-stroke patients’ trust in a robot-operated and a computer-operated rehabilitation platform during and after a long-term experience with the platform. We conducted 29 interviews with 16 stroke patients who underwent a long-term rehabilitation process, assisted by either a SAR or a computer interface. The intervention lasted 5–7 weeks per patient, for a total of 229 sessions over 18 months. By using a qualitative research method—extended interviews “in the wild” with stroke patients, over a long-term rehabilitation process—our study reveals users’ perspectives regarding factors affecting trust in the SAR or in the computer interface during their rehabilitation process. The results support the assertion that SARs have an added value in the rehabilitative care of stroke patients; It appears that personal characteristics, such as age and gender, have an effect on the users’ acceptance of a non-human operator as a practice assistant. Our findings support the notion that SARs augment rehabilitative therapies beyond a standard computer; Importantly, patients appreciated different aspects of the non-human operator in the two groups: In the SAR group, users preferred its functional performance over its anthropomorphized social skills; In the Computer group, users highlighted its contribution to the training of their memory skills.

No abstract