Evaluating the Role of a Socially Assistive Robot in Children’s Mental Health Care

Abstract

Socially assistive robots (SARs) present a promising intervention for addressing the increasing prevalence of childhood stress. This innovative technology has become increasingly common in practical implementation. However, empirical support has not kept pace with the robots' growing popularity. The present study set out to provide an empirical test of the stress-buffering capability of this technology. We examined the effects of the presence of an SAR on self-reported measures of stress in a community sample of 70 children (40 girls, 30 boys) between the ages of 7 and 10 years old. Child participants were randomly assigned to either a robot-present or a robot-absent condition during the Trier Social Stress Test for Children. Contrary to our predictions, we did not detect a stress-buffering effect of the presence of the robot. Instead, the primary analysis showed that the robot's presence led to a larger decrease in positive affect following the task. However, further analyses found no significant difference in positive affect when accounting for baseline group differences. Exploratory analyses of the nature of children's interactions with the SAR during the stressful task found that higher levels of parentreported social anxiety were associated with greater prosocial behaviors towards the SAR, thus signifying a potential target for future interventions. Further work on SARs is needed to determine the optimal timing and robotic specifications that would maximize the potential of this developing technology to improve children's mental health care.

Use of automated conversational agents in improving young population mental health: a scoping review

“…Of the 25 studies, 19 were recently published (between 2020 and 2023) 8 – 10 , 12 , 26 – 40 . Studies were conducted predominantly in the US ( n = 12) 11 , 12 , 27 , 28 , 33 , 34 , 38 , 41 – 45 , followed by Europe ( n = 5) 10 , 26 , 29 , 32 , 35 , Asia ( n = 4) 9 , 31 , 36 , 39 , New Zealand ( n = 2) 37 , 40 , and Australia ( n = 1) 30 .…”

“…Only 3 of the CA were the focus of more than one study – Paro 11 , 41 , 45 , Nao 8 , 38 , and Woebot 12 , 42 . These automated CAs were predominantly disembodied chatbots ( n = 15) 10 , 26 , 28 – 32 , 35 – 37 , 40 , 42 – 44 , followed by robots ( n = 7) 8 , 9 , 33 , 34 , 38 , 41 , 45 . Automated CAs with a virtual representation were the focus in 2 studies 11 , 27 .…”

“…Regarding the dialog system underlying the process of conversation, almost half of automated CAs ( n = 12) employed natural language processing and machine learning to carry on an interaction 8 , 9 , 12 , 27 , 30 , 31 , 34 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 43 , 45 . Predefined dialog or interactions assembled, and matched to the user input in a dynamic manner was used in 10 studies 10 , 11 , 26 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 40 , 44 , while 3 used a mixed dialog system 36 , 37 , 42 .…”

“…Predefined dialog or interactions assembled, and matched to the user input in a dynamic manner was used in 10 studies 10 , 11 , 26 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 40 , 44 , while 3 used a mixed dialog system 36 , 37 , 42 . These agents communicated through text ( n = 13) 10 , 12 , 26 , 28 – 30 , 32 , 35 , 37 , 40 , 42 – 44 , speech ( n = 2) 8 , 38 , and non-verbal cues ( n = 4) 9 , 34 , 41 , 45 , while multiple modalities communication was employed by 5 studies 11 , 31 , 33 , 36 , 39 . For one study no information was provided on modality of communication 27 .…”

“…For one study no information was provided on modality of communication 27 . Among automated CAs investigated in the included studies, 17 are available to purchase or for free use 8 – 10 , 12 , 27 , 31 , 33 , 34 , 36 – 38 , 40 – 45 .…”