Telepresence Robots for Remote Participation in Higher Education
Open accessAbstract
Telepresence robotics enable people to synchronously communicate and interact at a distance. The Covid-19 pandemic caused in-person teaching and research activities to migrate online in almost all society sectors (including higher education). In hybrid learning environments, telepresence robots have the potential to increase the effectiveness of distance learning by enhancing user presence, allowing students to remain physically embodied and socially connected. However, to be accepted, trusted, and adopted in higher education, more work is needed to investigate the specific requirements of telepresence robotics in these settings. In this paper, we present the results of a mixed methods study exploring how the use of a telepresence robot in a simulated learning and research environment affects trust in and user experience of telepresence robots used in higher education. We aimed to understand users’ attitudes and requirements for the use of telepresence robots in academic teaching and research. Our findings suggest that the level of trust is contingent upon the user, the performance of the robot, and the credibility of the developing organisation. We additionally map out the current challenges encountered by the use of telepresence robots in these settings and provide suggestions to improve user experience by highlighting new software and hardware capabilities.
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?
Invisible labour has expanded with barriers in technology exploding since the online migration of teaching with Covid-19, adding transitions between multiple apps and platforms.
“This invisible labour has expanded, with barriers in technology [15] exploding since the online migration of teaching with Covid-19 [46]: this comes with additional transitions between multiple apps and platforms, which can be difficult for neurotypical and neurodivergent students alike, with the consideration that disabled students are already operating on fewer spoons [56] (lower energy”
From Burnout by Design: How Digital Systems Overburden Neurodivergent Students in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as [46]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Burnout by Design: How Digital Systems Overburden Neurodivergent Students in Higher Education
Tcherdakoff, N. A., Marshall, P., Dowthwaite, A., Bird, J., & Cox, A. L. (2025) · Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Human-Computer Interaction for Work · doi:10.1145/3729176.3729193 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Meiners, A.-L., Yildiz, Z., Gerling, K., Alexandrovsky, D., & Biernacka, K. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/3814957
- Authors
- Hu, J., Reyes Cruz, G., Fischer, J., & Maior, H. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Meeting of the Symposium on Human-Computer Interaction for Work
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2024-06-25
- Pages
- 1-14
- OpenAlex
- W4399913226
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 5.36
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Annual Symposium on Human-Computer Interaction for Work (CHIWORK) (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/T022493/1 and EP/V00784X/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Keywords
- telepresence robots, remote participation, higher education, trust in robots, user experience, hybrid learning, distance education, COVID-19 pandemic, embodiment, social connectedness, user requirements, robot performance, institutional credibility
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