Robot use self-efficacy in healthcare work (RUSH): development and validation of a new measure
- 390 Downloads
The aim of this study was to develop and validate a measure of robot use self-efficacy in healthcare work (RUSH) based on social cognitive theory and the theory of planned behavior. This article provides a briefing on technology-specific self-efficacy and discusses the development, validation, and implementation of an instrument that measures care workers’ self-efficacy in working with robots. The validity evaluation of the Finnish-language measure was based on representative survey samples gathered in 2016. The respondents included practical and registered nurses, homecare workers, and physiotherapists. A majority of the respondents were female. The full instrument consists of a set of six task-specific self-efficacy items concerning general views of technological skills, confidence in learning robot use, and confidence in guiding others in robot use. Three items were chosen for the shorter version of the measure. The face validity, construct validity, and reliability were established to validate the instruments. Both 3-item and 6-item measures were found to be highly consistent in structure. Respondents with high levels of RUSH also reported more general self-efficacy and interest in technology, on average. A very brief instrument of three items is convenient to include in repeated employee surveys.
KeywordsCare work Nurse Service robot Task-specific self-efficacy Technology
We thank Dr Teo Keipi from the University of Turku for refining the item translations.
Compliance with ethical standards
This research is part of the project Robots and the Future of Welfare Services (2015–2020), which is funded by the Academy of Finland’s Strategic Research Council.
The authors report no financial conflicts related to this study.
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
- Ahonen O, Kouri P, Kinnunen U-M, Junttila P, Liljamo P, Arifulla D, Saranto K (2016) The development process of eHealth strategy for nurses in Finland. In: Sermeus Walter, Procter Paula M, Weber Patrick (eds) Nursing informatics. IOS, Amsterdam, pp 203–207Google Scholar
- Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, NJGoogle Scholar
- Bekey GA (2005) Autonomous robots: From biological inspiration to implementation and control. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Compeau DR, Higgins CA (1991) A social cognitive theory perspective on individual reactions to computing technology. Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Information Systems, ACM Dec 1991, pp 187–198Google Scholar
- Erkkilä S, Simberg S, Hyvärinen M (2016) Jos minä nyt kuitenkin jaksan: Selvitys lähi- ja perushoitajien kokemasta työkuormasta. Finnish Union of Practical NursesGoogle Scholar
- Fraunhofer (2017). Care-O-bot—The Service Robot. https://www.fraunhofer.de/en/research/fields-of-research/health-environment/assistance-systems/service-roboter-care-o-bot.html. Accessed Apr 2017
- Härkäpää K (1995) Optimism, competence and coping skills. Definitions and empirical studies in rehabilitation. Rehabilitation FoundationGoogle Scholar
- Heerink M (2011) Exploring the influence of age, gender, education and computer experience on robot acceptance by older adults. In The sixth ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. LausanneGoogle Scholar
- Henry KE, Hager DN, Pronovost PJ, Saria S (2015) A targeted real-time early warning score (TREWScore) for septic shock. Sci Transl Med 7Google Scholar
- Kang SC (2012) Initiation of the SuanLien Living Lab—a living Lab with an Elderly Welfare Focus. Int J of Autom and Smart Tech 2Google Scholar
- Kilpeläinen T (2010) Foreign nurses’ guide to Finnish working life. European Social Fund (ESF)Google Scholar
- Koistinen P, Lilja K (1988) Consensual adaptation to new technology. In: Richard Hyman, Wolfgang Streeck (eds) New technology and industrial relations. Basil Blackwell NY, pp 265–272Google Scholar
- Koskinen S, Salminen L, Stolt M, Leino-Kilpi H (2014) The education received by nursing students regarding nursing. Scand J Caring 3Google Scholar
- Laanala R (2017) City of Helsinki Service Centre unitizes video visit. http://www.finlandhealth.fi/-/city-of-helsinki-s-service-centre-utilizes-videovisit-virtual-care-up-to-85-more-cost-efficient-than-physical-home-care. Accessed Apr 2017
- Malhotra Y, Galletta DF (1999) Extending the technology acceptance model to account for social influence: Theoretical bases and empirical validation. In Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Science, pp 1–14Google Scholar
- Melkas H, Hennala L, Pekkarinen S, Kyrki V (2016) Human impact assessment of robot implementation in Finnish elderly care. Proc ICServ 2016:202–206Google Scholar
- Menon SP (2015) Maximizing time with the patient: the creative concept of a physician scribe. Curr Oncol Rep 17Google Scholar
- Mukai T, Hirano S, Nakashima H., Kato Y, Sakaida Y, Guo S, Hosoe S (2010) Development of a nursing-care assistant robot Riba that can lift a human in its arms. In Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), IEEE/RSJ International Conference (pp 5996–6001). IEEEGoogle Scholar
- Ohlyansky L, Cairns P, Thimbleby H (2007) Validating the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) tool cross-culturally. Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCI… but not as we know it, volume 2. British Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
- Romppel M, Herrmann-Lingen C, Wachter R, Edelmann F, Düngen H-D, Pieske B, Grande G (2013) A short form of the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE-6): development, psychometric properties and validity in an intercultural non-clinical sample and a sample of patients at risk for heart failure. Psychosoc Med 10:1–7Google Scholar
- Schroeders U, Wilhelm O, Olaru G (2016) Meta-heuristics in short scale construction: ant colony optimization and genetic algorithm. PLOS One 11(11)Google Scholar
- Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M (1995) Optimistic self-beliefs as a resource factor in coping with stress. In Extreme stress and communities: Impact and intervention. Springer Netherlands, pp 159–177Google Scholar
- Special Eurobarometer 382 (2012) Public Attitudes towards robots. European CommissionGoogle Scholar