Parental Expectations, Concerns, and Acceptance of Storytelling Robots for Children
Abstract
Robots that tell children stories are becoming common. Given that the practice of parent-child storytelling is part of family culture, it is critical to investigate parental acceptance of storytelling robots. Drawing on technology acceptance models, the theory of planned behavior, and Bowen family systems theory, we conducted a mixed-methods study involving an online survey of 115 respondents and 18 in-person interviews. We aimed to propose a model of parental acceptance of storytelling robots contextualized in potential use case scenarios. Preliminary findings indicate an overall positive attitude towards children's storytelling robots and identify factors that can affect parental acceptance of these robots. This study may inform the design of storytelling robots tailored to the needs of parents and their children in the home.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Strong adaptive capabilities and affective qualities are essential for the efficacy of AI assistants.
“Furthermore, strong adaptive capabilities and affective qualities are also considered essential for the efficacy of AI assistants [33].”
From ChatScratch: An AI-Augmented System Toward Autonomous Visual Programming Learning for Children Aged 6-12 (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
Cites
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035 · see citing works
The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979) · Harvard University Press eBooks · doi:10.4159/9780674028845 · Cited by 26,084 · see citing works
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709 · see citing works
The Uncanny Valley [From the Field]
Mori, M., MacDorman, K., & Kageki, N. (2012) · IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine · doi:10.1109/mra.2012.2192811 · Cited by 3,542 · see citing works
Self-citationRomeo, R. R., Leonard, J., Robinson, S. T., West, M. R., Mackey, A. P., Rowe, M. L., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2018) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797617742725 · Cited by 797 · see citing works
Exploring influencing variables for the acceptance of social robots
de Graaf, M. M. A., & Ben Allouch, S. (2013) · Robotics and Autonomous Systems · doi:10.1016/j.robot.2013.07.007 · Cited by 499 · see citing works
Saygin, A. P., Chaminade, T., Ishiguro, H., Driver, J., & Frith, C. (2012) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsr025 · Cited by 452 · see citing works
User acceptance of information technology
VenkateshViswanath, MorrisMichael, G., DavisGordon, B., & DavisFred, D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.5555/2017197.2017202 · Cited by 365 · see citing works
Why Would I Use This in My Home? A Model of Domestic Social Robot Acceptance
de Graaf, M. M. A., Allouch, S. B., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2017) · Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/07370024.2017.1312406 · Cited by 255 · see citing works
Romeo, R. R. (2017) · Harvard Dataverse · doi:10.7910/dvn/didbmq · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Teaching Literature: Nine to Fourteen
Benton, M. J., & Fox, G. (1985) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Sulzby, E., & Teale, W. H. (1987) · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chen, L., Xiao, S., Chen, Y., Song, Y., Wu, R., & Sun, L. (2024) · Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642229 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Cagiltay, B., Mutlu, B., & Kerr, M. L. (2023) · Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference · doi:10.1145/3585088.3589386 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lin, C., MacDorman, K. F., Šabanović, S., Miller, A. D., & Brady, E.
- Affiliations
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Venue
- Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2020-03-23
- Pages
- 346-348
- OpenAlex
- W3014655892
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4
- FWCI
- 2.12
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- parental acceptance, technology acceptance, theory of planned behavior, Bowen family systems theory, family culture, use case scenarios
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
