Effect of a human-type communication robot on cognitive function in elderly women living alone
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Considering the high prevalence of dementia, it would be of great value to develop effective tools to improve cognitive function. We examined the effects of a human-type communication robot on cognitive function in elderly women living alone. MATERIAL/METHODS: In this study, 34 healthy elderly female volunteers living alone were randomized to living with either a communication robot or a control robot at home for 8 weeks. The shape, voice, and motion features of the communication robot resemble those of a 3-year-old boy, while the control robot was not designed to talk or nod. Before living with the robot and 4 and 8 weeks after living with the robot, experiments were conducted to evaluate a variety of cognitive functions as well as saliva cortisol, sleep, and subjective fatigue, motivation, and healing. RESULTS: The Mini-Mental State Examination score, judgement, and verbal memory function were improved after living with the communication robot; those functions were not altered with the control robot. In addition, the saliva cortisol level was decreased, nocturnal sleeping hours tended to increase, and difficulty in maintaining sleep tended to decrease with the communication robot, although alterations were not shown with the control. The proportions of the participants in whom effects on attenuation of fatigue, enhancement of motivation, and healing could be recognized were higher in the communication robot group relative to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that living with a human-type communication robot may be effective for improving cognitive functions in elderly women living alone.
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.
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 50 · Cited by 135
- Authors
- Tanaka, M., Ishii, A., Yamano, E., Ogikubo, H., Okazaki, M., Kamimura, K., Konishi, Y., Emoto, S., & Watanabe, Y.
- Affiliations
- Osaka City University (JP)
- PIP Co., Ltd., Chuo-ku, Osaka, Japan
- Osaka Science Museum (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Tanaka, Masaaki
- Venue
- Medical Science Monitor
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- CR550-CR557
- ISSN
- 1234-1010 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3560641
- OpenAlex
- W1991797265
- Cited by
- 135
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 4.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Medical Science Monitor (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Keywords
- cognitive function, dementia prevention, verbal memory, Mini-Mental State Examination, salivary cortisol, sleep quality, fatigue, motivation, healing, companion robots
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition, Cognition Disorders, Communication, Female, Humans, Hydrocortisone, Japan, Plethysmography, Surveys and Questionnaires, Relaxation, Robotics, Sleep
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