Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction 2017
DOI: 10.1145/3029798.3038400
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social Human-Robot Interaction for the Elderly

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
3

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
6
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…To illustrate the lack of cohesive jargon in the field, the following concepts were encountered during a literature search: socially assistive robots (e.g., Tapus and Mataric 2008;Khaksar et al 2015), mental commit robots (e.g., Wada et al 2003), social robots (e.g., Bartl et al 2016), and care robots (Jenkins and Draper 2015), etc. Though a cohesive conceptualization is yet to be formulated, one can observe a rough distinction between play based/motivational robots that are supposed to enhance cognitive function and/or social interaction (e.g., Wada et al 2003), and robots that are specifically used for pragmatic care related purposes (e.g., Zlatintsi et al 2017). This observation is also aligned with health policy literature on elder care, in which caregiving is considered both a social and a pragmatic activity (Pavolini and Ranci 2013).…”
Section: Robotsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To illustrate the lack of cohesive jargon in the field, the following concepts were encountered during a literature search: socially assistive robots (e.g., Tapus and Mataric 2008;Khaksar et al 2015), mental commit robots (e.g., Wada et al 2003), social robots (e.g., Bartl et al 2016), and care robots (Jenkins and Draper 2015), etc. Though a cohesive conceptualization is yet to be formulated, one can observe a rough distinction between play based/motivational robots that are supposed to enhance cognitive function and/or social interaction (e.g., Wada et al 2003), and robots that are specifically used for pragmatic care related purposes (e.g., Zlatintsi et al 2017). This observation is also aligned with health policy literature on elder care, in which caregiving is considered both a social and a pragmatic activity (Pavolini and Ranci 2013).…”
Section: Robotsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The concept behind these algorithms is to design interaction techniques that will enhance the communication making it natural and intuitive, enabling robots to understand, interact and respond to human intentions intelligently. For a review, we refer the reader to [24,25,26,27,28,29].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One such area concerns the development of multimodal interfaces, required to facilitate natural HRI, including visual RGB/Depth and audio input, for multimodal human-robot interactions. The concept behind these systems is to design robots and interaction techniques that will enhance the communication making it natural and intuitive, so as the robots are able to understand, interact and respond to human intentions intelligently; for a review, we refer the reader to [2,3,4,5,6,7,8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%