1. Experimenting with iCat in an eldercare environment
Marcel Heerink
Instituut voor Information Engineering - Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Universiteit van Amsterdam - Human Computer Systems & Intelligent Systems
co-researchers:
Vanessa Evers, Bob Wielinga , Ben Krose

2. Background

3. Robots & eldercare
Paro
Pearl
Aibo

4. Research question
Is there a measurable influence of perceived social abilities on the acceptance of autonomous interactive systems by elders in an eldercare environment?

5. Approach Quantitative research iCat Wizard of Oz +S and –S version
Questionnaire
Observations
Functional and conversational acceptance
Field experiment: 2 eldercare institutions (Archipel and Ankerplaats)

6. Abilities listening attentively (looking at the participant, nodding),
being nice and pleasant to interact with (smiling, being helpful),
remembering little personal details about people (using their names),
being expressive,
admitting mistakes.

7. Conditions

8. Possible functionalities
Agenda/reminder
Device interface
Monitor
Companion

9. Questionnaire UTAUT + SA = social abilities (-)
PE = performance expectancy
EE = effort expectancy
SI = social influence
AT = attitude toward using technology
SE = self-efficacy
ANX = anxiety
ITU = intention to use
+ SA = social abilities (-)
+ feeling comfortable talking to a robot (conversational acceptance)
5 point scale
Questions instead of statements

15. Results 1 Construct Cronbach’s Alpha t Sig. (2-tailed)
performance expectancy
,7649
-0,1327
0,8953
effort expectancy
,8610
0,3622
0,7195
social influence
,2997*
0,3453
0,7322
attitude toward using technology
,8889
0,4961
0,6230
self-efficacy
,8942
0,4567
0,6509
anxiety
,4303*
-0,0046
0,9964
intention to use
,8954
0,4036
0,6891
all constructs
,9346
all questions
,9084

16. Results 2 Did you feel uncomfortable talking to a robot? condition N
Mean t
Sig. (2-tailed)
more social 17
1,00
-3,7500
0,0015
less social 19
1,53

17. Results 3 Would you want to use the iCat immediately if you could?
gender N
Mean t
Sig. (2-tailed)
male 11
1,45
2,1717
0,0426
female 25
0,72

18. Observations conversational expressions by participants more social
less social
nodding head 66 54
shaking head 16 15
greet with hand 2
'don't know' gesture 3
move away 4
approach robot 17 7
smile 42 30
laugh 26 9
surprise
show irritation (frown) 1
verbal greeting 36 21

19. Observations 2 Item t Sig. (2-tailed) Mann-Whitney U
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
Positive 1
2,450
0,020
92,000
0,027
Negative 2
-1,685
0,108
131,000
All items
2,063
0,047
102,500
0,060

20. Movie
Start

21. Conclusions & discussion
UTAUT constructs show no significant differences between more en less social condition
There are significant differences concerning “conversational acceptance”: participants felt more uncomfortable and used more conversational expressions with a more social robot
Other differences are related to gender (could be a generation related result)
Further research:
On screen agents
Different experimental conditions?
Work on ‘social abilities?’
More elaborate observation model