A study on an applied behavior analysis-based robot-mediated listening comprehension intervention for ASD

Abstract

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a lifelong developmental condition that affects an individual’s ability to communicate and relate to others. Despite such challenges, early intervention during childhood development has shown to have positive long-term benefits for individuals with ASD. Namely, early childhood development of communicative speech skills has shown to improve future literacy and academic achievement. However, the delivery of such interventions is often time-consuming. Socially assistive robots (SARs) are a potential strategic technology that could help support intervention delivery for children with ASD and increase the number of individuals that healthcare professionals can positively affect. For SARs to be effectively integrated in real-world treatment for individuals with ASD, they should follow current evidence-based practices used by therapists such as Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). In this work, we present a study that investigates the efficacy of applying well-known ABA techniques to a robot-mediated listening comprehension intervention delivered to children with ASD at a university-based ABA clinic. The interventions were delivered in place of human therapists to teach study participants a new skill as a part of their overall treatment plan. All the children participating in the intervention improved in the skill being taught by the robot and enjoyed interacting with the robot, as evident by high occurrences of positive affect as well as engagement during the sessions. One of the three participants has also reached mastery of the skill via the robot-mediated interventions.

Robot-Based Intervention for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Literature Review

“…[51] NAO Social interaction: General Getting into interaction [9], [11], [16], [18], [20], [31], [35], [45], [46], [53] Darwin-Mini, ROMO, Kaspar, KiliRo, iRobiQ, CARO, Pleo, Keepon, Labo-1, Autonomous social robot, Sphero Turn-taking [16], [21], [32], [35], [43], [46], [52], [56] Zoomer dog, Darwin-Mini, ROMO, NAO, Rovio, Labo-1, ZECA, Autonomous social robot Child's engagement in an activity [23], [26], [40], [43], [52] Darwin-Mini, ROMO, SAM, ZECA, NAO Following / imitating movements [9], [20], [46], [52], [60] Kaspar, FACE, Labo-1, NAO, ZECA Social attention abilities [11], [15], [39], [56] NAO, Keepon Social interaction [31], [41], [53] KiliRo, Pleo, NAO Social abilities [35] Autonomous social robot Sensory processing skills [23] Darwin-Mini, ROMO Basic eye contact [30] iRobiQ, CARO Conversational interaction [31] Pleo Socio-emotional behaviors [23] Darwin-Mini, ROMO Social interaction: Focus on self-initiated interaction [16], [41],…”

“…However, another study [64] even recommended a familiarisation phase, where the children can freely explore the robot in order to reduce anxiety levels and make the robot more attractive. Similarly, the next study [40] suggested the therapist should familiarize the participants with the intervention and the robot.This was due to the fact that at the beginning of the interventions, 2 from 3 participants were not responding to the robot. Researchers observed that initial human prompts helped the children understand how to interact with the robot.…”

“…One article [32] indicated future research should develop diverse training activities that can sustain children's engagement over prolonged training durations. In reference to the above, another study [40] suggested that to increase the motivation of children during intervention sessions can be used to by interspersing the requests a child has mastered with the skills they are learning during the intervention. Another study [52] described using tablet by children to control and respond to robot to improve the child's engagement in the activity.…”

“…However, an attractive study scenario may not be sufficient to keep participants engaged. In one study [40] the robot was using five phrases for social praise which was paired with dances. Despite the participants initially enjoy- VOLUME 4, 2016 ing these reinforcers during the interventions, researchers noticed they became monotonous over longer periods of time.…”

“…In the next study [24] reinforcement (snacks or access to toys) was offered by the teacher at the end of each pretest, post test and training session. Researchers also suggest reward systems should be customized to individual subjects' needs, interests, and social abilities ( [40], [44]). The clinicians also recommended the robot build a positive relationship with the children and offer reinforcers (e.g., preferred items, edibles, and social reinforcers) without making requests or demands.…”