International Journal of Social Robotics

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 445–455 | Cite as

Matching Robot KASPAR to Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Therapy and Educational Goals

  • Claire A. G. J. Huijnen
  • Monique A. S. Lexis
  • Luc P. de Witte
Continuing Education


The aim of this study was to identify the potential contribution of therapy robot KASPAR to the therapy and/or educational goals for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) according to professionals and practitioners in the field. An online questionnaire and focus groups were applied to elicit the expectations of a group of 54 multidisciplinary ASD practitioners about therapy and/or educational goals KASPAR can contribute to. Findings indicate that professionals expect KASPAR to be of added value to ASD objectives in domains such as ‘communication’, ‘social/interpersonal interaction and relations’, and ‘play’, but also in objectives related to ‘emotional wellbeing’ and ‘preschool skills’. A top 10 is created of professionals’ expectations of potential added value for robot KASPAR for working on therapy and educational goals for children with ASD. Professionals are convinced that KASPAR can be useful in interventions for a broad range of therapy and education goals for children with autism spectrum disorder.


Autism Therapy and education objectives Children Robot KASPAR ASD 



This work was supported by a grant of the RAAK-PRO programme of SIA (“Stichting Innovatie Alliantie”) for the project “Social robots in care” (project number PRO-4-10). This is a program from the Dutch ministry of education, culture and science to stimulate collaboration between public and private organisations. The authors sincerely thank our beloved friend and colleague Gert Jan Gelderblom\(^{\dag }\) for his highly appreciated and valuable devotion to this work and the entire domain of (robot) assisted technologies for people in need of support. Moreover, gratefulness is expressed for the contribution of all ASD professionals that participated in this research shining their light on the potential added value of KASPAR in interventions for children with autism spectrum disorder.


  1. 1.
    American Psychiatric Association. (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th edn. American Psychiatric Publishing, Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Scassellati B, Admoni H, Mataric M (2012) Robots for use in autism research. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 14:275–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Diehl JJ, Schmitt LM, Villano M, Crowell CR (2012) The clinical use of robots for individuals with autism spectrum disorders: a critical review. Res. Autism Spectr. Disord. 6(1):249–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aresti-Bartolome N, Garcia-Zapirain B (2014) Technologies as support tools for persons with autistic spectrum disorder: a systematic review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 11(8):7767–7802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cabibihan J-J, Javed H, Ang M, Aljunied SM (2013) Why robots? A survey on the roles and benefits of social robots in the therapy of children with autism. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 5(4):593–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Huijnen CAGJ, Lexis MAS, Jansens R, de Witte LP (2016) Mapping robots to therapy and educational objectives for children with autism spectrum disorder. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 46(6):2100–2114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Warren Z, Zheng Z, Das S, Young EM, Swanson A, Weitlauf A, Sarkar N (2014) Brief report: development of a robotic intervention platform for young children with ASD. J Autism Dev DisordGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tapus A, Peca A, Aly A, Pop C, Jisa L, Pintea S, Rusu AS, David DO (2012) Children with autism social engagement in interaction with Nao, an imitative robot–A series of single case experiments. Interact Stud 13(3):315–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Robins B, Dautenhahn K, Boekhorst RT, Billard A (2005) Robotic assistants in therapy and education of children with autism: can a small humanoid robot help encourage social interaction skills? Univers Access Inf Soc 4(2):105–120. doi: 10.1007/s10209-005-0116-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Srinivasan SM, Lynch KA, Bubela DJ, Gifford TD, Bhat AN (2013) Effect of interactions between a child and a robot on the imitation and praxis performance of typically devloping children and a child with autism: a preliminary study. Percept Mot Ski. 116(3):885–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fujimoto I, Matsumoto T, De Silva PR, Kobayashi M, Higashi M (2011) Mimicking and evaluating human motion to improve the imitation skill of children with autism through a robot. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 3(4):349–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pierno AC, Mari M, Lusher D, Castiello U (2008) Robotic movement elicits visuomotor priming in children with autism. Neuropsychologia 46:448–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dautenhahn K, Dubowski J, Robins B (2006) Does appearance matter in the interaction of children with autism with a humanoid robot? Interaction Studies 7(3):509–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robins B, Dautenhahn K (2014) Tactile interactions with a humanoid robot: novel play scenario implementations with children with autism. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 6(3):397–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dautenhahn K (2007) Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human-robot interaction. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 362(1480):679–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dautenhahn K, Werry I (2004) Towards interactive robots in autism therapy: background, motivation and challenges. Pragmat. & Cogn. 12(1):1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Duquette A, Michaud F, Mercier H (2008) Exploring the use of a mobile robot as an imitation agent with children with low-functioning autism. Auton. Robots 24(2):147–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Warren ZE, Zheng Z, Swanson AR, Bekele E, Zhang L, Crittendon JA, Weitlauf AF, Sarkar N (2015) Can robotic interaction improve joint attention skills? J Autism Dev Disord 45(11):3726–3734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Anzalone SM, Tilmont E, Boucenna S, Xavier J, Jouen A-L, Bodeau N, Maharatna K, Chetouani M, Cohen D (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. Res Autism Spectr Disord 8(7):814–826. doi: 10.1016/j.rasd.2014.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bekele E, Crittendon JA, Swanson A, Sarkar N, Warren ZE (2013) Pilot clinical application of an adaptive robotic system for young children with autism. Autism 18(5):598–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bekele ET, Lahiri U, Swanson AR, Crittendon JA, Warren ZE, Sarkar N (2013) A step towards developing adaptive robot-mediated intervention architecture (ARIA) for children with autism. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 21(2):289–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Huskens B, Palmen A, Van der Werff M, Lourens T, Barakova E (2014) Improving collaborative play between children with autism spectrum disorders and their siblings: the effectiveness of a robot-mediated intervention based on Lego\(\textregistered \) therapy. J Autism Dev Disord 45(11):3746–3755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wainer J, Robins B, Amirabdollahian F, Dautenhahn K (2014) Using the humanoid robot KASPAR to autonomously play triadic games and facilitate collaborative play among children with autism. IEEE Trans. Auton. Ment. Dev. 6(3):183–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wainer J, Dautenhahn K, Robins B, Amirabdollahian F (2013) A pilot study with a novel setup for collaborative play of the humanoid robot KASPAR with children with autism. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 6(1):45–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Huskens B, Verschuur R, Gillesen J, Didden R, Barakova E (2013) Promoting question-asking in school-aged children with autism spectrum disorders: effectiveness of a robot intervention compared to a human-trainer intervention. Dev. Neurorehabil. 16(5):345–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fridin M, Belokopytov M (2014) Acceptance of socially assistive humanoid robot by preschool and elementary school teachers. Comput. Human Behav. 33:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Oros M, Nikolić M, Borovac B, Jerković I (2014) Children’ s preference of appearance and parents ’ attitudes towards assistive robots. IEEE-RAS int. conf. Humanoid Robot., pp. 360–365Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Costescu C, David D (2014) Attitudes toward using social robots in psychotherapy. Transylv J Psychol 15(1):3–20Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shamsuddin S, Yussof H, Hanapiah FA, Mohamed S, Jamil NFF, Yunus FW (2015) Robot-assisted learning for communication-care in autism intervention. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on rehabilitation robotics (ICORR), Singapore, 11–14 August, pp 822–827. doi: 10.1109/ICORR.2015.7281304
  30. 30.
    Wainer J, Dautenhahn K, Robins B, Amirabdollahian F (2010) Collaborating with Kaspar: Using an autonomous humanoid robot to foster cooperative dyadic play among children with autism. In: Humanoid robots (humanoids), 2010 10th IEEE-RAS international conference on, pp. 631–638Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Robins B, Amirabdollahian F, Ze J, Dautenhahn K (2010) Tactile interaction with a humanoid robot for children with autism: A case study analysis involving user requirements and results of an initial implementation. In: RO-MAN, 2010 IEEE pp. 704–711Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dautenhahn K, Nehaniv CL, Walters ML, Robins B, Kose-Bagci H, Mirza NA, Blow M (2009) KASPAR–a minimally expressive humanoid robot for human-robot interaction research. Appl. Bionics Biomech. 6(3):369–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Iacono I, Lehmann H, Marti P, Robins B, Dautenhahn K (2011) Robots as social mediators for children with Autism—a preliminary analysis comparing two different robotic platforms. In: Development and Learning (ICDL), 2011 IEEE international conference on, 2011, vol. 2, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Costa S, Lehmann H, Robins B, Dautenhahn K, Soares F (2013) Where is your nose?: Developing body awareness skills among children with autism using a humanoid robotGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Robins B, Dautenhahn K, Dickerson P (Feb. 2009) From isolation to communication: a case study evaluation of robot assisted play for children with autism with a minimally expressive humanoid robot. 2009 Second Int. Conf. Adv. Comput. Interact. pp. 205–211Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Costa S, Lehmann H, Dautenhahn K, Robins B, Soares F (2014) Using a humanoid robot to elicit body awareness and appropriate physical interaction in children with autism. Int. J. Soc. Robot. pp. 1–14Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schnelle E, Thiersch M (1979) The metaplan-method: communication tools for planning and learning groups. Metaplan-GmbHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    World Health Organization (2007) International classification of functioning, disability, and health: children & youth version: ICF-CY. World Health Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 15(9):1277–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Thill S, Pop CA, Belpaeme T, Ziemke T, Vanderborght B (2012) Robot-assisted therapy for autism spectrum disorders with (partially) autonomous control: challenges and outlook. Paladyn, J Behav Robot 3(4):209–217. doi: 10.2478/s13230-013-0107-7 Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Heerink M, Kröse B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2(4):361–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27(3):425–478Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Centre Technology in CareZuyd University of Applied SciencesHeerlenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary CareMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations