Cited by 56Social Robot Interaction and HRITechnology Use by Older AdultsInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Pilot testing a digital pet avatar for older adults

Open access
Chi, Nai-Ching, Sparks, Olivia, Lin, Shih-Yin, Lazar, Amanda, Thompson, Hilaire J., Demiris, George·2017·Geriatric Nursing

Abstract

Social isolation in older adults is a major public health concern. An embodied conversational agent (ECA) has the potential to enhance older adults' social interaction. However, little is known about older adults' experience with an ECA. In this paper, we conducted a pilot study to examine the perceived acceptance and utility of a tablet-based conversational agent in the form of an avatar (termed "digital pet") for older adults. We performed secondary analysis of data collected from a study that employed the use of a digital pet in ten older adults' homes for three months. Most of the participants enjoyed the companionship, entertainment, reminders, and instant assistance from the digital pet. However, participants identified limited conversational ability and technical issues as system challenges. Privacy, dependence, and cost were major concerns. Future applications should maximize the agent's conversational ability and the system's overall usability. Our results can inform future designs of conversational agents for older adults, which need to include older adults as system co-designers to maximize usability and acceptance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2017.04.002

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Previous pilot studies of the Care Coach avatar have demonstrated the ECA's usability and efficacy in home-dwelling older adults.

    “Previous pilot studies of the Care Coach avatar have demonstrated the ECA’s usability and efficacy in home-dwelling older adults.”

    From A Protocol-Driven, Bedside Digital Conversational Agent to Support Nurse Teams and Mitigate Risks of Hospitalization in Older Adults: Case Control Pre-Post Study (2019) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Methods (Design; page not available) describe home use of the Care.Coach digital pet by ten older adults, and the Discussion reports companionship and perceived benefits. But the paper explores acceptance and usability, notes increasing usability challenges, and does not establish broad efficacy in home-dwelling older adults. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Existing studies have generally evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of health technology, and they have specifically evaluated social agents as a tool for decreasing loneliness and social isolation in older adults.

    “Existing studies have generally evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of health technology, and they have specifically evaluated social agents as a tool for decreasing loneliness and social isolation in older adults [25-29].”

    From A Protocol-Driven, Bedside Digital Conversational Agent to Support Nurse Teams and Mitigate Risks of Hospitalization in Older Adults: Case Control Pre-Post Study (2019) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Abstract and Discussion (page unavailable) describe a pilot evaluation of a conversational agent’s acceptance and usability among older adults. The Conclusions report companionship and enhanced social interaction, but the paper does not evaluate whether the agent decreased loneliness or social isolation. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The results of the previous pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of the Care Coach platform to improve clinically meaningful aspects of patient care in the home.

    “The results of the previous pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of the Care Coach platform to improve clinically meaningful aspects of patient care in the home.”

    From A Protocol-Driven, Bedside Digital Conversational Agent to Support Nurse Teams and Mitigate Risks of Hospitalization in Older Adults: Case Control Pre-Post Study (2019) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Methods (Design) describe a three-month deployment of the Care.Coach digital pet in ten older adults’ homes, and the Results (Benefits) report perceived benefits, including companionship, reminders, and enhanced social interaction. The paper does not demonstrate improvement in clinically meaningful patient-care outcomes; its conclusions concern companionship and social interaction, while noting usability issues. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In a pilot study of home-dwelling older adults, Chi et al provided a qualitative perspective on utility and comfort with the Care Coach avatar; participants reported positive results in terms of companionship, social support, and health information.

    “In a pilot study of home-dwelling older adults, Chi et al provided a qualitative perspective on utility and comfort with the Care Coach avatar presented in this paper [26]. Participants reported positive results in terms of companionship, social support, and health information.”

    From A Protocol-Driven, Bedside Digital Conversational Agent to Support Nurse Teams and Mitigate Risks of Hospitalization in Older Adults: Case Control Pre-Post Study (2019) · cites this paper as [26]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chi, N.-C., Sparks, O., Lin, S.-Y., Lazar, A., Thompson, H. J., & Demiris, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Chi, Nai-Ching
Venue
Geriatric Nursing
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-11
Volume
38
Issue
6
Pages
542-547
ISSN
0197-4572 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2611866909
Cited by
56
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
5.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Geriatric Nursing (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health/National Institute for Nursing Research Aging and Informatics Training Program (T32NR014833)
  • National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (DGE-1256082)
  • Taiwan Ministry of Education Technologies Incubation Scholarship
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
digital PET, embodied conversational agents, older adults, social isolation, technology acceptance, companion robots, usability, privacy concerns, technology dependence, social interaction
MeSH terms
Aged, Attitude to Computers, Communication, Female, Humans, Pilot Projects, Social Isolation, User-Computer Interface, Animal Assisted Therapy, 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