Service robots in hospitals: new perspectives on niche evolution and technology affordances
Open accessAbstract
Changing demands in society and the limited capabilities of health systems have paved the way for robots to move out of industrial contexts and enter more human-centered environments such as health care. We explore the shared beliefs and concerns of health workers on the introduction of autonomously operating service robots in hospitals or professional care facilities. By means of Q-methodology, a mixed research approach specifically designed for studying subjective thought patterns, we identify five potential end-user niches, each of which perceives different affordances and outcomes from using service robots in their working environment. Our findings allow for better understanding resistance and susceptibility of different users in a hospital and encourage managerial awareness of varying demands, needs, and surrounding conditions that a service robot must contend with. We also discuss general insights into presenting the Q-methodology results and how an affordance-based view could inform the adoption, appropriation, and adaptation of emerging technologies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
When exploring affordances which technological artifacts provide, Q-methodology proved a useful tool to systematically analyze the subjective perception of these artifacts.
“In particular, when exploring affordances which technological artifacts provide, it proved a useful tool to systematically analyze the subjective perception of these artifacts (cf.Mettler et al. 2017;Mettler and Wulf 2018).”
From How affordances of chatbots cross the chasm between social and traditional enterprise systems (2020) · cites this paper as Mettler et al. 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 96 · Cited by 134
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- AHN HS, KUO I-H, DATTA C, STAFFORD R, KERSE N, PERI K, BROADBENT E and MACDONALD BA (2014) Design of a kiosk type healthcare robot system for older people in private and public places. In Simulation, modeling, and programming for autonomous robots (BRUGALI D, BROENINK JF, KROEGER T and MACDONALD BA, Eds.), pp 578-589, Springer, Cham.
- BOUCHARD T (1976) Field research methods: Interviewing, questionnaires, participant observation, systematic observation, unobtrusive measures. In Handbook of industrial and organisational psychology (DUNNETTE M, Ed.), pp 363-413, Rand NcNally, Chicago.
- HAFERMALZ E, HOVORKA DS and RIEMER K (2015) Shared secret places: Social media and affordances. Proceedings of the 26th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Adelaide, Australia, pp 1- 11.
- THOMPSON G (1966) The evaluation of public opinion. In Reader in public opinion and communication (BERELSON B and JANOWITZ M, Eds.), pp 7-12, Free Press, New York.
- Authors
- Mettler, T., Sprenger, M., & Winter, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Lausanne (CH)
- University of St.Gallen (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Mettler, Tobias
- Sprenger, Michaela
- Winter, Robert
- Venue
- European Journal of Information Systems
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-09
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 451-468
- ISSN
- 0960-085X (ISSN-L)
- 1476-9344
- OpenAlex
- W2602050702
- Cited by
- 134
- References
- 96
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 4
- FWCI
- 21.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- iris.unil.ch
- Locations
- European Journal of Information Systems (publishedVersion)
- IRIS (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
- SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robotics and Automated Systems
- Keywords
- service robots, hospital robotics, healthcare automation, technology affordances, health workers' perceptions, technology adoption, technology appropriation, resistance to automation, Q methodology, human-robot interaction
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
