CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 82

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding the potential of PARO for healthy older adults

McGlynn, Sean A., Kemple, Shawn, Mitzner, Tracy L., King, Chih-Hung Aaron, Rogers, Wendy A.·2017·International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
DOI 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.12.004PMC PMC5604326
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

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.ijhcs.2016.12.004

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. Ballarini, 2003, Pet therapy. Animals in human therapy, Acta Bio Med. Atenei Parm., 74, 97
  2. Banks, 2002, The effects of animal-assisted therapy on loneliness in an elderly population in long-term care facilities, J. Gerontol. Ser. A: Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., 57, M428, 10.1093/gerona/57.7.M428 · DOI
  3. Banks, 2008, Animal-assisted therapy and loneliness in nursing homes: use of robotic versus living dogs, J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc., 9, 173, 10.1016/j.jamda.2007.11.007 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Beer, J.M., Takayama, L., 2011. Mobile remote presence systems for older adults: acceptance, benefits, and concerns. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction. ACM, pp. 19–26. · DOI
  5. Berkman, 1979, Social networks, host resistance, and mortality: a nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents, Am. J. Epidemiol., 109, 186, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112674 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Broadbent, 2010, Attitudes and reactions to a healthcare robot, Telemed. e-Health, 16, 608, 10.1089/tmj.2009.0171 · DOI
  7. Campbell, 1959, Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix, Psychol. Bull., 56, 81, 10.1037/h0046016 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Chang, W.-L., Šabanovic, S., Huber, L., 2014. Observational study of naturalistic interactions with the socially assistive robot PARO in a nursing home. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. IEEE, pp. 294–299. · DOI
  9. Cornwell, 2008, The social connectedness of older adults: a national profile, Am. Sociol. Rev., 73, 185, 10.1177/000312240807300201 · DOI · Paper page
  10. De Graaf, 2013, Exploring influencing variables for the acceptance of social robots, Robot. Auton. Syst., 61, 1476, 10.1016/j.robot.2013.07.007 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Dykstra, 2005, Changes in older adult loneliness results from a seven-year longitudinal study, Res. Aging, 27, 725, 10.1177/0164027505279712 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Frey, 2010, Baby boomers and the new demographics of America's seniors, Generations, 34, 28
  13. Gallego-Perez, J., Lohse, M., Evers, V., 2013. Robots to motivate elderly people: present and future challenges, 2013 IEEE RO-MAN. IEEE, pp. 685–690. · DOI
  14. Giusti, L., Marti, P., 2006. Interpretative dynamics in human robot interaction, Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2006. ROMAN 2006. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, pp. 111–116. · DOI
  15. Heerink, 2008, The influence of social presence on acceptance of a companion robot by older people, J. Phys. Agents, 2, 33
  16. Heerink, 2010, Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model, Int. J. Soc. Robot., 2, 361, 10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Heerink, 2010, Relating conversational expressiveness to social presence and acceptance of an assistive social robot, Virtual Real., 14, 77, 10.1007/s10055-009-0142-1 · DOI
  18. Holden, 2010, The technology acceptance model: its past and its future in health care, J. Biomed. Inform., 43, 159, 10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Jones, 1985, The problem of loneliness in the elderly in the community: characteristics of those who are lonely and the factors related to loneliness, Br. J. Gen. Pract., 35, 136
  20. Kanamori, 2001, A day care program and evaluation of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) for the elderly with senile dementia, Am. J. Alzheimer'S. Dis. Other Dement., 16, 234, 10.1177/153331750101600409 · DOI
  21. King, 2006, A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model, Inf. Manag., 43, 740, 10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Knickman, 2002, The 2030 problem: caring for aging baby boomers, Health Serv. Res., 37, 849, 10.1034/j.1600-0560.2002.56.x · DOI · Paper page
  23. Lazar, A., Thompson, H.J., Piper, A.M., Demiris, G., 2016. Rethinking the Design of Robotic Pets for Older Adults. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, pp. 1034–1046. · DOI · Paper page
  24. Lee, 2015, PERSPECTIVE: older adults' adoption of technology: an integrated approach to identifying determinants and barriers, J. Prod. Innov. Manag., 32, 747, 10.1111/jpim.12176 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Libin, 2004, Therapeutic robocat for nursing home residents with dementia: preliminary inquiry, Am. J. Alzheimer'S. Dis. Other Dement., 19, 111, 10.1177/153331750401900209 · DOI
  26. McGlynn, S., Snook, B., Kemple, S., Mitzner, T.L., Rogers, W.A., 2014a. Therapeutic robots for older adults: investigating the potential of paro. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction. ACM, pp. 246–247. · DOI
  27. McPherson, 2006, Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks over two decades, Am. Sociol. Rev., 71, 353, 10.1177/000312240607100301 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Mitzner, 2010, Older adults talk technology: technology usage and attitudes, Comput. Hum. Behav., 26, 1710, 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.020 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Mitzner, 2014, Identifying the potential for robotics to assist older adults in different living environments, Int J. Soc. Robot, 6, 213, 10.1007/s12369-013-0218-7 · DOI
  30. Murray, 1997, Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause 1990–2020: global burden of disease study, Lancet, 349, 1498, 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)07492-2 · DOI
  31. Musha, 2002, A new EEG method for estimating cortical neuronal impairment that is sensitive to early stage Alzheimer's disease, Clin. Neurophysiol., 113, 1052, 10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00128-1 · DOI
  32. Odendaal, 2003, Neurophysiological Correlates of Affiliative Behaviour between Humans and Dogs, Vet. J., 165, 296, 10.1016/S1090-0233(02)00237-X · DOI · Paper page
  33. Paepcke, S., Takayama, L., 2010. Judging a bot by its cover: an experiment on expectation setting for personal robots, Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 2010 In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 45–52. · DOI
  34. Perissinotto, 2012, Loneliness in older persons: a predictor of functional decline and death, Arch. Intern. Med., 172, 1078, 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.1993 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Prakash, 2014, Why some humanoid faces are perceived more positively than others: effects of human-Likeness and task, Int. J. Soc. Robot., 7, 309, 10.1007/s12369-014-0269-4 · DOI
  36. Robinson, H., MacDonald, B., Broadbent, E., 2014. Physiological effects of a companion robot on blood pressure of older people in residential care facility: A pilot study. Australas. J. Ageing. · DOI
  37. Sabanovic, S., Bennett, C.C., Chang, W.-L., Huber, L., 2013. PARO robot affects diverse interaction modalities in group sensory therapy for older adults with dementia. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR). IEEE, pp. 1–6. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Shibata, 2012, Investigation on people living with seal robot at home, Int. J. Soc. Robot., 4, 53, 10.1007/s12369-011-0111-1 · DOI
  39. Shibata, T., Tanie, K., 2001. Physical and affective interaction between human and mental commit robot. In: Proceedings 2001 ICRA. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, pp. 2572–2577. · DOI
  40. Shibata, 2005, Human interactive robot for psychological enrichment and therapy, Proc. Aisb. Citeseer, 98
  41. Smarr, 2014, Domestic robots for older adults: Attitudes, preferences, and potential, Int. J. Soc. Robot., 6, 229, 10.1007/s12369-013-0220-0 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Stafford, R., Broadbent, E., Jayawardena, C., Unger, U., Kuo, I.H., Igic, A., Wong, R., Kerse, N., Watson, C., MacDonald, B.A., 2010. Improved robot attitudes and emotions at a retirement home after meeting a robot, RO-MAN, 2010 IEEE. IEEE, pp. 82–87. · DOI
  43. Streiner, 2003, Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency, J. Personal. Assess., 80, 99, 10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Taggart, W., Turkle, S., Kidd, C.D., 2005. An interactive robot in a nursing home: Preliminary remarks, Towards Social Mechanisms of AndroidScience: A COGSCI Workshop.
  45. Tamura, 2004, Is an entertainment robot useful in the care of elderly people with severe dementia?, J. Gerontol. Ser. A: Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., 59, M83, 10.1093/gerona/59.1.M83 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Tapus, 2007, Socially assistive robotics [Grand challenges of robotics], Robot. Autom. Mag., IEEE, 14, 35, 10.1109/MRA.2007.339605 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Van de Mortel, 2008, Faking it: social desirability response bias in self-report research, Aust. J. Adv. Nurs., 25, 40
  48. Wada, K., Shibata, T., 2006. Robot therapy in a care house-its sociopsychological and physiological effects on the residents, Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006. IEEE, pp. 3966–3971. · DOI
  49. Wada, 2007, Living with seal robots—its sociopsychological and physiological influences on the elderly at a care house, IEEE Trans. Robot., 23, 972
  50. Wada, K., Shibata, T., Musha, T., Kimura, S., 2005a. Effects of robot therapy for demented patients evaluated by EEG.(IROS 2005). 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, pp. 1552–1557.
  51. Wada, 2004, Effects of robot-assisted activity for elderly people and nurses at a day service center, Proc. IEEE, 92, 1780, 10.1109/JPROC.2004.835378 · DOI
  52. Watson, 1988, Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales, J. Personal. Soc. Psychol., 54, 1063, 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Wilcoxon, 1945, Individual comparisons by ranking methods, Biom. Bull., 80, 10.2307/3001968 · DOI · Paper page
  54. Wu, 2012, Designing robots for the elderly: appearance issue and beyond, Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr., 54, 121, 10.1016/j.archger.2011.02.003 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 82

Metadata

Authors
McGlynn, S. A., Kemple, S., Mitzner, T. L., King, C.-H. A., & Rogers, W. A.
Venue
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
100
Pages
33-47
ISSN
1071-5819
DOI
10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.12.004
PMC
PMC5604326
Cited by
82
References
10
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Funders
  • Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award Institutional Research Training Grant ([T32AG000175])
  • Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (P01 AG17211)
  • Fulton County Elder Health Scholarship

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