Cited by 165Social Robot Interaction and HRITechnology Use by Older AdultsRobotics and Automated Systems

The domesticated robot: design guidelines for assisting older adults to age in place

Open access
Beer, Jenay M., Smarr, Cory-Ann, Chen, Tiffany L., Prakash, Akanksha, Mitzner, Tracy L., Kemp, Charles C., Rogers, Wendy A.·2012·Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Abstract

Many older adults wish to remain in their own homes as they age [16]. However, challenges in performing home upkeep tasks threaten an older adult's ability to age in place. Even healthy independently living older adults experience challenges in maintaining their home [13]. Challenges with home tasks can be compensated through technology, such as home robots. However, for home robots to be adopted by older adult users, they must be designed to meet older adults' needs for assistance and the older users must be amenable to robot assistance for those needs. We conducted a needs assessment to (1) assess older adults' openness to assistance from robots; and (2) understand older adults' opinions about using an assistive robot to help around the home. We administered questionnaires and conducted structured group interviews with 21 independently living older adults (ages 65-93). The questionnaire data suggest that older adults prefer robot assistance for cleaning and fetching/organizing tasks overall. However their assistance preferences discriminated between tasks. The interview data provided insight as to why they hold such preferences. Older adults reported benefits of robot assistance (e.g., the robot compensating for limitations, saving them time and effort, completing undesirable tasks, and performing tasks at a high level of performance). Participants also reported concerns such as the robot damaging the environment, being unreliable at or incapable of doing a task, doing tasks the older adult would rather do, or taking up too much space/storage. These data, along with specific comments from participant interviews, provide the basis for preliminary recommendations for designing mobile manipulator robots to support aging in place.

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 · 10.1145/2157689.2157806

Cites

25 of 25 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?

  • Some studies indicate older adults' preference for using robots for household purposes more than for companionship.

    “Specific to older adults, some studies in HCI and HRI indicate older adults' preference for using robots for household purposes more than for companionship [5,13]”

    From "Phantom Friend" or "Just a Box with Information": Personification and Ontological Categorization of Smart Speaker-based Voice Assistants by Older Adults (2019) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Results (Assistance Preference Checklist Data; page unavailable) report that older adults preferred robot assistance for many household tasks, particularly cleaning. The study compared robot versus human assistance for home-based tasks; it did not compare household uses of robots with companionship, so the claimed relative preference is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Most prior HRI participatory design studies with older adults do not include the actual robot, relying instead on video demonstrations, storyboard images, or other images of robots.

    “Most of these studies do not include the actual robot, and they instead rely on video demonstrations [6, 16], storyboard images showing what a robot may do [5], or other images of robots [9].”

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

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [15]Fisk AD, Rogers W,A, Charness N, Czaja SJ, and Sharit J 2009. Designing for Older Adults: Principles and creative Human Factors Approaches (2ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  2. [25]Smarr C-A, Fausset CB, and Rogers WA 2011. Understanding the potential for robot assistance for older adults in the home environment (HFA-TR-1102). Atlanta, GA: Georgia Tech, School of Psychology, Human Factors and Aging Laboratory. http://hdl.handle.net/1853/39670

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beer, J. M., Smarr, C.-A., Chen, T. L., Prakash, A., Mitzner, T. L., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A.
Affiliations
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction
Publisher
ACM
Published
2012-03-05
Volume
2012
Pages
335-342
OpenAlex
W2113295453
Cited by
165
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 6
FWCI
32.69
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Georgia Institute of Technology
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (P01AG017211)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robotics and Automated Systems
Keywords
home robots, assistive robots, aging in place, older adults, needs assessment, robot acceptance, cleaning tasks, mobile manipulators, user preferences, user concerns

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