A Robot of My Own: Participatory Design of Socially Assistive Robots for Independently Living Older Adults Diagnosed with Depression
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Social robots have been found to provide a sense of social presence and communication that may reduce loneliness and social isolation and enable older adults to connect with family, friends, and their community.
“Social robots have been found to provide a sense of social presence and communication that may reduce loneliness and social isolation and enable older adults to connect with family, friends, and their community (Beer and Takayama, 2011; Šabanović et al., 2015; Ostrowski et al., 2019).”
From Personal Narratives in Technology Design: The Value of Sharing Older Adults’ Stories in the Design of Social Robots (2021) · cites this paper as Šabanović et al., 2015
Little emphasis has been placed on analyzing older adults' informally told stories about their prior technology experiences or experiences with social robots.
“Despite the evidence of this approach, little emphasis has been placed on analyzing older adults’ informally told stories about their prior technology experiences or experiences with social robots.”
From Personal Narratives in Technology Design: The Value of Sharing Older Adults’ Stories in the Design of Social Robots (2021) · cites this paper as Šabanović et al. (2015)
Informal personal narratives from everyday people, such as older adults, have not been considered meaningful data in the storytelling lens in human-computer interaction.
“The storytelling lens in human-computer interaction has primarily focused on personas, design fiction, and other stories crafted by designers, yet informal personal narratives from everyday people have not been considered meaningful data, such as storytelling from older adults.”
From Personal Narratives in Technology Design: The Value of Sharing Older Adults’ Stories in the Design of Social Robots (2021) · cites this paper as Šabanović et al. (2015)
Lee et al. (2017) and Šabanović et al. (2015)'s co-design process was with older adults who have depression, and their results focused on a social robot for companionship without the additional focus of the social robot as a tool for therapy applications.
“While Lee et al. (2017) and Šabanović et al. (2015)’s co-design process was with older adults who have depression, the results focused on a social robot for companionship without the additional focus of the social robot as a tool for therapy applications as was referenced in our study.”
From Personal Narratives in Technology Design: The Value of Sharing Older Adults’ Stories in the Design of Social Robots (2021) · cites this paper as Šabanović et al. (2015)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 100
- Authors
- Šabanović, S., Chang, W.-L., Bennett, C. C., Piatt, J. A., & Hakken, D.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Šabanović, Selma
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer International Publishing
- Published
- 2015
- Pages
- 104-114
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- 1611-3349
- OpenAlex
- W1424293901
- Cited by
- 100
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 13.48
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- socially assistive robots, older adults, depression, participatory design, social interaction, companionship, therapist involvement, independent living
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review