Can Children Learn Creativity from a Social Robot?
Open accessAbstract
Children's creativity contributes to their learning outcomes and personal growth. Standardized measures of creative thinking reveal that as children enter elementary school, their creativity drops. In this work, we evaluated whether a social robotic peer can help 6-10-year-old children think creatively by demonstrating creative behavior. We designed verbal and non-verbal behaviors of the social robot that constitute interaction patterns for artificial creativity. 51 participants played the Droodle Creativity Game with the robot to generate creative titles for ambiguous images. One group of participants interacted with the creative robot, and one group interacted with the non-creative robot. Participants that interacted with the creative robot generated significantly higher number of Droodle titles, expressed greater variety in titles, and scored higher on the Droodles' creativity. We observe that children can model a social robotic peer's creativity, and hence inform robot interaction patterns for artificial creativity that can foster creativity in children.
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?
Kant defined creative genius as the ability to produce works that are both original (novel) and exemplary (valuable), a definition accepted in HCI research.
“Early philosophers such as Kant define creative genius, which is also accepted in HCI research [3,37], as the ability to produce works that are not only “original” (novel) but also “exemplary” (valuable) ( [28] as cited in [42]).”
From Child-AI Co-Creation: A Review of the Current Research Landscape and a Proposal for Six Design Considerations (2025) · cites this paper as [3]
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 42 · Cited by 93
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Davis, G. A. (1997). Identifying creative students and measuring creativity. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 269-281). Needham Heights, MA: Viacom.
- Kahn Jr, P. H., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Gill, B. T., Shen, S., Ruckert, J. H., & Gary, H. E. (2016, March). Human creativity can be facilitated through interacting with a social robot. In The Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (pp. 173-180). IEEE Press.
- Price, R., & Lovka, B. (2000). Droodles: The classic collection. Tallfellow Press.
- Torrance, E. P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Norms-Technical Manual Research Edition-Verbal Tests, Forms A and B- Figural Tests, Forms A and B. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press
- Authors
- Ali, S., Moroso, T., & Breazeal, C.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2019 on Creativity and Cognition
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2019-06-13
- Pages
- 359-368
- OpenAlex
- W2953270966
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12
- FWCI
- 17.34
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Creativity and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Robotics and Engineering
- Keywords
- creativity, social robots, children, computational creativity, elementary school students
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
