Socially Assistive Robots: Measuring Older Adults' Perceptions
Open accessAbstract
To address manpower shortages, health care leaders recommend technology, including robots, to facilitate and augment processes for delivery of efficient, safe care. Little is known regarding older adults' perceptions of socially assistive robots (SARs). Using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use Technology framework, a survey was developed and tested for capturing older adults' likelihood to use SARs. The Robot Acceptance Survey (RAS) comprises three subscales: Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, and Attitude. Older adults completed the RAS pre- and post-experimental procedure with a SAR. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the subscales ranged from 0.77 to 0.89. Subscales were sensitive to change, with more positive reactions after exposure to SAR activities. Future studies must identify robotic programming capable of providing cognitive, physical, and social assistance, as well as person-, activity-, situation-, and robot-specific factors that will influence older adults' acceptance of SARs. [ Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 43 (12), 35–43.]
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?
Existing studies have generally evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of health technology, and they have specifically evaluated social agents as a tool for decreasing loneliness and social isolation in older adults.
“Existing studies have generally evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of health technology, and they have specifically evaluated social agents as a tool for decreasing loneliness and social isolation in older adults [25-29].”
From A Protocol-Driven, Bedside Digital Conversational Agent to Support Nurse Teams and Mitigate Risks of Hospitalization in Older Adults: Case Control Pre-Post Study (2019) · cites this paper as [25]
The Abstract and Discussion describe a survey of older adults’ acceptance of socially assistive robots, including effort expectancy (ease of use). Although the paper discusses robots’ potential to address social needs, it does not evaluate whether they decrease loneliness or social isolation. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Harris, P. A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez, N., & Conde, J. G. (2009) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 · Cited by 51,384 · see citing works
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
Determination and Quantification Of Content Validity
LYNN, M. R. (1986) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017 · Cited by 6,775 · see citing works
The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health
(2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-5720 · Cited by 2,105 · see citing works
Assessing Acceptance of Assistive Social Agent Technology by Older Adults: the Almere Model
Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. (2010) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5 · Cited by 1,229 · see citing works
The future of nursing: leading change, advancing health
Rekha, S. G. (2020) · IP Journal of Paediatrics and Nursing Science · doi:10.18231/j.ijpns.2020.013 · Cited by 1,215 · see citing works
Socially intelligent robots: Dimensions of human-robot interaction
Dautenhahn, K. (2007) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.2004 · Cited by 1,210 · see citing works
Interactions with robots: the truths we reveal about ourselves
Broadbent, E. (2017) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958 · Cited by 547 · cited 16× · see citing works
“Little is known regarding older adults’ perceptions of socially assistive robots (SARs).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialExploring 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
Pino, M., Boulay, M., Jouen, F., & Rigaud, A. (2015) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2015.00141 · Cited by 352 · see citing works
de Graaf, M. M. A., Allouch, S. B., & Klamer, T. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.030 · Cited by 299 · see citing works
Measuring acceptance of an assistive social robot: a suggested toolkit
Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. J. (2009) · IEEE RO-MAN · doi:10.1109/roman.2009.5326320 · Cited by 276 · see citing works
Acceptance and Attitudes Toward a Human-like Socially Assistive Robot by Older Adults
Louie, W.-Y. G., McColl, D., & Nejat, G. (2014) · Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/10400435.2013.869703 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
Bedaf, S., Gelderblom, G. J., & de Witte, L. (2015) · Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/10400435.2014.978916 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
People respond better to robots than computer tablets delivering healthcare instructions
Mann, J. A., MacDonald, B. A., Kuo, I.-H., Li, X., & Broadbent, E. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.029 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Article Commentary: The Need for Higher Minimum Staffing Standards in U.S. Nursing Homes
Harrington, C. A., Schnelle, J. F., McGregor, M. J., et al. (2016) · Health Services Insights · doi:10.4137/hsi.s38994 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
The Comprehensive Process Model of Engagement
Cohen-Mansfield, J., Marx, M., Freedman, L. S., Murad, H., Regier, N., Thein, K., & Dakheel-Ali, M. (2011) · The American journal of geriatric psychiatry · doi:10.1097/jgp.0b013e318202bf5b · Cited by 86 · see citing works
de Graaf, M. M. A., Allouch, S. B., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2015) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_19 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
A Robotic Coach Architecture for Elder Care (ROCARE) Based on Multi-User Engagement Models
Fan, J., Bian, D., Zheng, Z., Beuscher, L. M., NEWHOUSE, P. A., Mion, L. C., & Sarkar, N. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2016.2608791 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Self-citationDamholdt, M. F., Nørskov, M., Yamazaki, R., Hakli, R., Hansen, C. V., Vestergaard, C., & Seibt, J. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01701 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Sim, D. Y. Y., & Loo, C. K. (2014) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2014.12.017 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Cohen‐Mansfield, J., Marx, M. S., Dakheel‐Ali, M., & Thein, K. (2014) · American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jagp.2014.06.006 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Joosse, M., Sardar, A., Lohse, M., et al. (2013) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-013-0191-1 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Goris, E. D., Ansel, K. N., & Schutte, D. L. (2016) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.13026 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Strategies for dealing with future shortages in the nursing workforce: a review
Hussain, A., Rivers, P. A., Glover, S. H., et al. (2012) · Health Services Management Research · doi:10.1258/hsmr.2011.011015 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bott, N., Wexler, S., Drury, L., Pollak, C., Wang, V., Scher, K., & Narducci, S. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/13440 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
“Existing studies have generally evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of health technology, and they have specifically evaluated social agents as a tool for decreasing loneliness and social isolation in older adults [25-29].”
BackgroundMarchang, J., & Di Nuovo, A. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12042174 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
- Authors
- Beuscher, L. M., Fan, J., Sarkar, N., Dietrich, M. S., Newhouse, P. A., Miller, K. F., & Mion, L. C.
- Affiliations
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Mion, Lorraine C.
- Venue
- Journal of Gerontological Nursing
- Publisher
- SLACK, Inc.
- Published
- 2017-12
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 35-43
- ISSN
- 0098-9134 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-243X
- PMC
- PMC5989313
- OpenAlex
- W2734517545
- Cited by
- 106
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 5.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Gerontological Nursing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Vanderbilt University (TR000445, UL1‐TR000445)
- National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000445, TR000445)
- National Institute on Aging (R01AG062685, R21AG050483)
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (TR-000445)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
- Keywords
- socially assistive robots, older adults, technology acceptance, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, user attitudes, elderly care, robot-assisted care, survey development
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Perception, Quality of Life, Robotics
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
