Robotic Intervention Program for Enhancement of Social Engagement among Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
- 26 Downloads
This study investigated the effectiveness of a robotic intervention in enhancing the social engagement of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The clinical use of social or interactive robots is promising for enhancing the social skills of children with ASD. Teaching and intervention programs using humanoid robots for children with ASD are developing rapidly. In this study, a repeated-measures design was adopted to test the treatment effectiveness of a robotic intervention program; 14 students with ASD were recruited in this study. An individual-based social skills training program using the NAO robot was administered to each participant. Video recording was performed throughout the course of training. Systematic video analysis was conducted for the pre-intervention, mid-intervention, end of intervention and maintenance phases regarding 3 variables: frequency of eye contact, duration of eye contact, and frequency of verbal initiation. One-way analysis of variance for repeated measures was employed to demonstrate that the robotic intervention program significantly enhanced the eye contact (both frequency and duration) and verbal initiation of children with ASD. The robot served as a role model and facilitating agent to enable a therapeutic transaction between the child, environment, and activities to elicit self-initiated changes in the children with ASD.
KeywordsHuman robotic interaction Robotics ASD Social engagement
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This research was supported by the Internal Research Grant (RG87/2016-2017R) from the Education University of Hong Kong.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Conflict of Interest
The author declares there is no conflict of interest.
Informed consent was obtained from parents of the children with ASD who would participate in this study.
- American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5®). American Psychiatric Pub..Google Scholar
- Anzalone, S. M., Tilmont, E., Boucenna, S., Xavier, J., Jouen, A., Bodeau, N., . . . MICHELANGELO Study Group. (2014). How children with autism spectrum disorder behave and explore the 4-dimensional (spatial 3D time) environment during a joint attention induction task with a robot. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(7), 814–826.Google Scholar
- Cohen, B. H. (2008). Explaining psychological statistics. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Constantino, J. N., & Gruber, C. P. (2007). Social responsiveness scale (SRS). Los Angeles: Western psychological services.Google Scholar
- Constantino, J. N., & Gruber, C. P. (2012). Social responsiveness scale (SRS). Torrance: Western psychological services.Google Scholar
- Emanuel, R., & Weir, S. (1976). Catalysing communication in an autistic child in a LOGO-like learning environment. In Proceedings of the 2nd Summer Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour (pp. 118–129).Google Scholar
- Feil-Seifer, D., & Mataric, M. (2008). Robot-assisted therapy for children with autism spectrum disorders. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 49–52).Google Scholar
- Hanley-Hochdorfer, K., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J., & Elinoff, M. J. (2010). Social stories to increase verbal initiation in children with autism and asperger's disorder. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 484.Google Scholar
- Hood, D., Lemaignan, S., & Dillenbourg, P. (2015). When children teach a robot to write: An autonomous teachable humanoid which uses simulated handwriting. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 83–90).Google Scholar
- Kim, E., Berkovits, L., Bernier, E., Leyzberg, D., Shic, F., Paul, R., & Scassellati, B. (2013). Social robots as embedded reinforcers of social behavior in children with autism. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 43(5), 1038–1049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1645-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Portney, L. G., & Watkins, M. P. (2000). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., Te Boekhorst, R., & Billard, A. (2004). Effects of repeated exposure to a humanoid robot on children with autism. In Designing a more inclusive world (pp. 225–236). Springer.Google Scholar
- Roger, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and theory. Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
- Scassellati, B. (1999). Imitation and mechanisms of joint attention: A developmental structure for building social skills on a humanoid robot. In Computation for metaphors, analogy, and agents (pp. 176–195). Springer.Google Scholar
- Srinivasan, S. M., Lynch, K. A., Bubela, D. J., Gifford, T. D., & Bhat, A. N. (2013). Effect of interactions between a child and a robot on the imitation and praxis performance of typically developing children and a child with autism: A preliminary study. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 116(3), 885–904. https://doi.org/10.2466/15.10.PMS.116.3.885-904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar