Older adults’ communication with an interactive humanoid robot

Social robotic devices that are physically embodied like human-like Nao (SoftBank Robotics, Tokyo, Japan) or pet-like Paro (Intelligent System C. Ltd., Nanto, Tomaya, Japan) are not only designed to perform specific care tasks but also to act as a social companion and as a device for social interaction [1]. These kinds of robots are called socially assistive robots and can be divided into two subgroups according to their operational field: service robots and companion robots. Service robots are developed to carry out daily tasks for the user, which often require some sort of physical interaction with the environment. Companion robots are intended to socially interact with the user to enhance their overall well-being [1]. A variety of studies in a review reported positive effects of the use of companion robots on older adults’ psychological health. The use of this kind of robot has been shown to correlate with a decreased feeling of loneliness [3].

In the development of socially interactive robots for use with older adults, there is increasing focus on usability and acceptability. Walters et al. (2008) showed that a human-like appearance and interaction modalities are crucial for usage and acceptance [20]. The imitation of human interaction (especially nonverbal) is a central challenge for companion robots, which are mainly designed for social interaction through speech [8]. According to Six et al. [16] communication is defined by six determinants among which they name messages and interactivity as key characteristics of communication. Messages and interactivity show through verbal and nonverbal signals of communication. Nonverbal interaction features have a prominent role in human communication [15]. Nonverbal signals are deployed to portray personality traits, convey attitudes, express emotions or modulate a verbal message [2, 5]. Companion robots (especially humanoid companion robots) have a physical entity to which the user applies an expectation of certain social skills [9]. In a study with primary school students it was investigated whether the integration of verbal and nonverbal communication by the robot in social interaction increases user engagement [4]. Although there is a lot of important research in the field of robotics and older adults, specifically the question of how older adults evaluate the verbal and nonverbal communication skills of humanoid robots has not yet been comprehensively answered. Current studies often address the age group up to retirement age and not the group of older adults aged 65 years and older or focus on very specific user scenarios of the age group 65 years and older [11, 12].

In the present study we aim to give insights to older adults’ perceptions of the verbal and nonverbal communicative abilities of the humanoid companion robot Pepper. A second aim is to present the dispreferences/preferences of the participants for verbal and nonverbal communication features, such as gestures or eye movements, for interaction with a socially assistive humanoid robot.

The robot used in this study is called Pepper and was manufactured by the company SoftBank Robotics (Tokyo, Japan). Pepper is frequently used in the context of studies addressing challenges in human-computer interaction [14]. Besides verbal communication via speech, Pepper can communicate nonverbally by performing gestures with its arms and fingers and by moving its torso and head. In addition, it is equipped with illuminated rings around its eyes and illuminated patches on its shoulders, which indicate attention.

The present study used a mixed methods design. Quantitative questionnaires were used before and after the interaction of older adults with the Pepper robot. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted after interaction with the robot. All interviews were recorded using audio equipment and transcribed based on predefined transcription rules. The interview guide included the following questions:

To answer the research questions discussed in this article, the article focuses exclusively on the qualitative part of the study. Information on the quantitative part can be found in Supplementary Data 1 Material and Methods and Supplementary Data 2 Results.

The participants were adults aged 65 years and older. They were recruited from a participant database of a geriatrics research group.

Participants’ expectations before the interaction with Pepper, as well as their experience and evaluation of verbal and nonverbal communication after the interaction, were explored through a semi-structured interview.

The participants did not expect a robot with the ability to communicate nonverbally. The reported previous experience of older adults with robots in television, movies, or elsewhere might have affected the expectations towards the abilities of Pepper. This is also reflected by Sundar et al. who stated that past exposure to robots in the media has an impact on older adults’ perceptions of robots [17]. This kind of influence was particularly noticeable in our data when looking at the low number of statements regarding the expectations towards the interactive abilities of the robot. Nevertheless, all older adults in our study engaged in the interaction with the robot and used communication via speech. After the interaction, many positive statements about the communicative abilities of the robot were expressed, which are the core competencies of companion robots [1]. The voice and speech abilities were regarded as surprisingly fluent and advanced. The nonverbal skills were particularly positively highlighted. The gestures, eye blinking, and body movements of the robot were perceived as positive and described as ‘trust-building’ and ‘pleasant’. Although participants did not have any expectations of the nonverbal abilities of the robot, this aspect, which also plays an important role in human-to-human interaction, was a positive surprise for many of the older adults.

Studies have shown that there is a need for robots to act as a partner for social interaction with older adults [1]. In contrast, this need was not expressed by any of the participants in the present study. Our findings concur with those of Frennert et al. [7] who found that older adults tend to evaluate robots as ‘good for others, but not for themselves’. They also stated: ‘Perhaps the unwillingness to imagine having an assistive robot is due to the reluctance to accept the physical and cognitive effects of aging’ [7, p. 26]. In our study, participants could envision robot use for individuals who are more affected by age-related functional limitations than they are.

The nonverbal communication abilities of the socially interactive robot were highlighted as particularly positive by the older adults. In the development of such robots, the ability to communicate with gestures, body movements, and facial expressions should be given consideration in order to contribute to successful human-robot communication.

It should be noted that the target group of older adults is very diverse and it is difficult to make general statements about their preferences and needs. This diversity is particularly significant regarding the attitude towards technology, their own health status, and the associated need for support as well as the existence of social contacts if attitudes and acceptance towards robots are to be recorded. Highly educated individuals with a high affinity for technology participated in the study. It is possible that our results cannot be generalized to the entire target group of older adults. Furthermore, the communicative capabilities of the robot were limited by restricted internet access due to data protection requirements. This may have influenced the evaluation.