search
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| — |
ar:alan-s-thoughts-on-does-appearance-matter-short [2014/08/11 16:02] (current) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | <u>'''Article:'''</u> [http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~comqkd/Robins+aRoman04.pdf Robots as Assistive Technology - Does Appearance Matter?] by Ben Robins, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Ren´e te Boekhorst, and Aude Billard | ||
| + | <u>'''Introduction to paper:'''</u> | ||
| + | |||
| + | An adult and an autistic child would play with a robotic doll, together. For some children the doll would be fully covered (like the Theatrical Robot study) but for others it would be dressed as a normal doll. Children accepted the plain, fully-covered doll quicker than the normally dressed doll - however, over time, both dolls were accepted. | ||
| + | |||
| + | <u>'''Application to personal research:'''</u> | ||
| + | |||
| + | It seems that both appearances are eventually accepted (if the object is obviously classified as a predictable toy) but that the more detailed the object is the more apprehensive the child will be <i>at first</i>. If Pleo, or another robot, isn't quickly accepted by children, that doesn't necessarily mean that it won't ever be. It might be good to break up TiLAR research into phases, like they did. | ||
| + | |||
| + | <u>'''Questions:'''</u> | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Is familiarization necessary? It seems like it would be a good idea, to encourage children to interact with the robot, without it acting too unpredictable at first. | ||
| + | * <i>DOES</i> appearance matter if both dolls are eventually accepted anyway? It doesn't sound like it makes a significant different. | ||
| + | |||
| + | <u>'''Additional notes from paper:'''</u> | ||
| + | |||
| + | * '''Triad of impairment''' was defined, again. | ||
| + | * It was mentioned that autistic children don't demonstrate much eye contact and don't get involved in interactive games much. | ||
| + | * They performed their research in three '''phases''': familiarization (child becomes aware of robot), learning (child is taught what the robot can do), and free interaction (the child initiates play with the robot). | ||
| + | * They chose to evaluate '''success''' based on the child's: eye gaze to, imitation of, touching, and proximity to, the robot. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | << [[Children Accepting Robots]] | ||
