Frumer Y. The short, strange life of the first friendly robot. IEEE SPECTRUM. 2020. https://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/humanoids/the-short-strange-life-of-the-first-friendly-robot. Accessed 21 May 2020.
Schwartz O. Untold history of AI: when charles babbage played chess with the original mechanical Turk. IEEE SPECTRUM. 2019. Available in https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/tech-history/dawn-of-electronics/untold-history-of-ai-charles-babbage-and-the-turk. Accessed 18 Mar 2019.
•• Broadbent E. Interactions with robots: the truths we reveal about ourselves. Annu Rev Psychol. 2017;68(9):1–926. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958This seminal work by Broadbent was the first major social robotics related piece to capture the attention of psychologists working across a number of subdisciplines, by outlining the value and utility of using robots to examine a number of fundamental features of human behavior, perception and cognition.
Duffy BR, Joue G. The paradox of social robotics: a discussion. AAAI Fall 2005 Symp Mach ethics. Hyatt Regency; 2005.
Pandey AK, Gelin R. A mass-produced sociable humanoid robot: pepper: the first machine of its kind. IEEE Robot Autom Mag. 2018;25:40–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2018.2833157.
de Graaf MMA, Ben Allouch S, van Dijk JAGM. What makes robots social?: a user’s perspective on characteristics for social human-robot interaction. In: Tapus A, André E, Martin J-C, Ferland F, Ammi M, editors. Soc robot. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2015. p. 184–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_19.
Dereshev D, Kirk D, Matsumura K, Maeda T. Long-term value of social robots through the eyes of expert users. Proc 2019 CHI Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2019. p. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300896.
Rivoire C, Lim A. Habit detection within a long-term interaction with a social robot: an exploratory study. Proc Int Work Soc Learn Multimodal Interact Des Artif Agents. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1145/3005338.3005342.
Breazeal C. JIBO, The world’s first social robot for the home [Internet]. Indiegogo. 2014. Available from: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/jibo-the-world-s-first-social-robot-for-the-home#/. Accessed 15 Sep 2014.
Hodson H. The first family robot. New Sci. 2014;223:21. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0262-4079(14)61389-0.
Martin D. Layoffs hit Jibo more than a month after social robot’s launch [Internet]. BostInno. 2017. Available from: https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/inno/stories/news/2017/12/15/layoffs-hit-jibo-more-than-a-month-after-social.html. Accessed 15 Dec 2017.
Ackerman E. Jibo is probably totally dead now - [Internet]. IEEE Spectr. 2018. Available from: https://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/home-robots/jibo-is-probably-totally-dead-now. Accessed 3 Dec 2018.
Heater B. The lonely death of Jibo, the social robot [Internet]. TechCrunch. 2019. Available from: https://techcrunch.com/2019/03/04/the-lonely-death-of-jibo-the-social-robot/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAKxruRDCPEMeI3RcsWrOES7hl3N5odhwrQH8w4HTsSHkaduBw8aaiaYgmVURrvZATXJAvQ5FM5NXpCK8ih5ERQ1gwF9jHxX1X36hQVABezUeFrg9BCbbkNUwmYay3vBxVd5hMrLTodPu6PrYK47oAHWLMzxUa6waS-1SBtT1l2eo. Accessed 4 Mar 2019.
Kinsella B. Consumer robots are dead; long live Alexa [Internet]. USA Today Tech. 2018. Available from: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2018/12/13/consumer-robots-dead-long-live-alexa/2272460002/. Accessed 13 Dec 2018.
Kinsella B. Jibo Shuts down, selling off robot parts [Internet]. Voicebot.ai. 2018. Available from: https://voicebot.ai/2018/12/03/jibo-shuts-down-selling-off-robot-parts/. Accessed 3 Dec 2018.
Linus Tech Tips. TERRIBLE $900 party trick – Jibo review [Video file] [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1RASlbIIVc&feature=youtu.be. Accessed 27 Dec 2017.
Williams A. Virtual assistants evolve, but will they be integrated in robots? [Internet]. Robot. Bus. Rev. 2018. Available from: https://www.roboticsbusinessreview.com/consumer/virtual-assistants-integrated-robots/. Accessed 8 Oct 2018.
Goodrich MA, Schultz AC. Human-robot interaction: a survey. found trends hum-comput interact, vol. 1. Hanover: Now Publishers Inc.; 2007. p. 203–75. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000005.
Mejia C, Kajikawa Y. Bibliometric analysis of social robotics research: identifying research trends and knowledgebase. Appl Sci. 2017;7:12. https://doi.org/10.3390/app7121316.
Šabanović S. Robots in society, society in robots: mutual shaping of society and technology as a framework for social robot design. Int J Soc Robot. 2010;2(4):439–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0066-7.
Sarrica M, Brondi S, Fortunati L. How many facets does a “social robot” have? A review of scientific and popular definitions online. Inf Technol People. 2019;33(1):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-04-2018-0203.
Dautenhahn K. Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human-robot interaction. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci The Royal Soc. 2007;362:679–704. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2006.2004.
Leite I, Martinho C, Paiva A. Social robots for long-term interaction: a survey. Int J Soc Robot. 2013;5:291–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0178-y.
Tanaka F, Isshiki K, Takahashi F, Uekusa M, Sei R, Hayashi K. Pepper learns together with children: development of an educational application. 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids). 2015:270–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2015.7363546.
Baraka K, Alves-Oliveira P, Ribeiro T. An extended framework for characterizing social robots. In: Jost C, Le Pévédic B, Belpaeme T, Bethel C, Chrysostomou D, Crook N, et al., editors. Human-Robot Interact Eval Methods Their Stand Springer Ser Bio- Neurosystems: Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 21–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42307-0_2.
Cross ES, Ramsey R. Mind meets machine: towards a cognitive science of human-machine interactions. Trends Cogn Sci. 2020;28:S1364–6613(20)30297–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.11.009.
Eyssel F. An experimental psychological perspective on social robotics. Robot Auton Syst. 2017;87:363–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2016.08.029.
Irfan B, Kennedy J, Lemaignan S, Papadopoulos F, Senft E, Belpaeme T. Social psychology and human-robot interaction: an uneasy marriage. Companion 2018 ACM/IEEE Int Conf Human-Robot Interact, vol. 2018. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. p. 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173386.3173389.
Belpaeme T. Learning from social robots. 2020 Int Symp Community-centric Syst. Hachioji, Tokyo, Japan; 2020. p. 12. https://doi.org/10.1109/CcS49175.2020.9231310.
Hoffman G, Zhao X. A primer for conducting experiments in human–robot interaction. J Hum-Robot Interact. New York: Association for Computing Machinery 2020:10:1:31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3412374.
• Henschel A, Hortensius R, Cross ES. Social cognition in the age of human–robot interaction. Trends Neurosci. 2020;43:373–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2020.03.013This recent opinion piece makes a case for using human neuroscience techniques in real-life, embodied interaction settings with robots to advance our knowledge of the human side of human-robot interaction, aspects of which have been surprisingly neglected in HRI research to date.
Gazzaniga MS, Mangun GR, editors. The cognitive neurosciences. 5th ed. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2014.
Cross ES, Hortensius R, Wykowska A. From social brains to social robots: applying neurocognitive insights to human-robot interaction. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2019;374:20180024. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0024.
Cao W, Song W, Li X, Zheng S, Zhang G, Wu Y, et al. Interaction with social robots: Improving gaze toward face but not necessarily joint attention in children with autism spectrum disorder. Front Psychol. 2019;10:1503. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01503/full.
Chevalier P, Kompatsiari K, Ciardo F, Wykowska A. Examining joint attention with the use of humanoid robots-a new approach to study fundamental mechanisms of social cognition. Psychon Bull Rev. 2020;27:217–36. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01689-4.
Gordon G. Social behaviour as an emergent property of embodied curiosity: a robotics perspective. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2019;374:20180029. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0029.
Kajopoulos J, Cheng G, Kise K, Müller HJ, Wykowska A. Focusing on the face or getting distracted by social signals? The effect of distracting gestures on attentional focus in natural interaction. Psychol Res. 2020;1:3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01383-4.
Banks J. Theory of mind in social robots: replication of five established human tests. Int J Soc Robot. 2020;12:403–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00588-x.
Bianco F, Ognibene D. In: Salichs MA, Ge SS, Barakova EI, Cabibihan J-J, Wagner AR, Castro-González Á, et al., editors. Soc Robot Transferring adaptive theory of mind to social robots: insights from developmental psychology to robotics. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p. 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35888-4_8.
Bossi F, Willemse C, Cavazza J, Marchesi S, Murino V, Wykowska A. The human brain reveals resting state activity patterns that are predictive of biases in attitudes toward robots. Sci Robot. 2020;5:eabb6652. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.abb6652.
Kuniyoshi Y. Fusing autonomy and sociality via embodied emergence and development of behaviour and cognition from fetal period. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2019;374:20180031. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0031.
Laban G, George J-N, Morrison V, Cross E. Tell me more! Assessing interactions with social robots from speech. Paladyn J Behav Robot. 2021;12:136–159. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2021-0011.
Stafford RQ, MacDonald BA, Jayawardena C, Wegner DM, Broadbent E. Does the robot have a mind? Mind perception and attitudes towards robots predict use of an eldercare robot. Int J Soc Robot. 2014;6:17–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0186-y.
Wallkötter S, Stower R, Kappas A, Castellano G. A robot by any other frame: framing and behaviour influence mind perception in virtual but not real-world environments. Proc 2020 ACM/IEEE Int Conf human-robot interact, vol. 2020. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. p. 609–18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374800.
Wang X, Krumhuber EG. Mind perception of robots varies with their economic versus social function. Front Psychol. 2018;9:1230. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01230/full.
Thellman S, Ziemke T. Do you see what i see? Tracking the perceptual beliefs of robots. iScience. 2020;23:101625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2020.101625.
Wiese E, Metta G, Wykowska A. Robots as intentional agents: using neuroscientific methods to make robots appear more social. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1663. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01663.
Hsieh T-Y, Chaudhury B, Cross ES. Human-robot cooperation in prisoner dilemma games: people behave more reciprocally than prosocially toward robots. Companion 2020 ACM/IEEE Int Conf human-robot interact, vol. 2020. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. p. 257–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371382.3378309.
Marchesi S, Perez-Osorio J, De Tommaso D, Wykowska A. Don’t overthink: fast decision making combined with behavior variability perceived as more human-like. 2020 29th IEEE Int Conf Robot Hum Interact Commun. Naples: IEEE; 2020. p. 54–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN47096.2020.9223522.
Natale L, Bartolozzi C, Pucci D, Wykowska A, Metta G. iCub: the not-yet-finished story of building a robot child. Sci Robot. 2017;2:eaaq1026. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aaq1026.
Sandini G, Metta G, Vernon D. RobotCub: an open framework for research in embodied cognition. 4th IEEE/RAS Int Conf Humanoid Robot 2004. 2004; Vol. 1. p. 13–32 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICHR.2004.1442111.
Ghiglino D, De Tommaso D, Willemse C, Marchesi S, Wykowska A. Can I get your (robot) attention? Human sensitivity to subtle hints of human-likeness in a humanoid robot’s behavior. 2020. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/kfy4g.
• Pérez-Osorio J, De Tommaso D, Baykara E, Wykowska A. Joint action with Icub: a successful adaptation of a paradigm of cognitive neuroscience in HRI. 2018 27th IEEE Int Symp Robot Hum Interact Commun. 2018:152–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525536This seminal work highlights the cutting-edge research performed by Wykowska and colleagues at the IIT develop cognitive neuroscience paradigms with the iCub robot, which enable research into fundamental aspects of social perception and cognition (such as joint attention) using real-life social scenarios with embodied robots.
Wykowska A, Chaminade T, Cheng G. Embodied artificial agents for understanding human social cognition. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2016;371:20150375. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0375.
Wykowska A. Social robots to test flexibility of human social cognition. Int J Soc Robot. 2020:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00674-5.
Langer A, Feingold-Polak R, Mueller O, Kellmeyer P, Levy-Tzedek S. Trust in socially assistive robots: considerations for use in rehabilitation. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2019;104:231–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.07.014.
Naneva S, Sarda Gou M, Webb TL, Prescott TJ. A systematic review of attitudes, anxiety, acceptance, and trust towards social robots. Int J Soc Robot. 2020:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00659-4.
Stower R, Kappas A. “Oh no, my instructions were wrong!” An exploratory pilot towards children’s trust in social robots. 2020 29th IEEE Int Conf robot hum interact Commun. Naples, Italy; 2020. p. 641–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN47096.2020.9223495.
Stower R. The Role of trust and social behaviours in children’s learning from social robots. 2019 8th Int Conf Affect Comput Intell Interact Work Demos. Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2019. p. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACIIW.2019.8925269.
Dziergwa M, Kaczmarek M, Kaczmarek P, Kędzierski J, Wadas-Szydłowska K. Long-term cohabitation with a social robot: a case study of the influence of human attachment patterns. Int J Soc Robot. 2018;10:163–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0439-2.
Cross ES, Riddoch KA, Pratts J, Titone S, Chaudhury B, Hortensius R. A neurocognitive investigation of the impact of socializing with a robot on empathy for pain. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2019;374:20180034. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0034.
Thunberg S, Thellman S, Ziemke T. Don’t judge a book by its cover: a study of the social acceptance of NAO vs. Pepper. Proc 5th Int Conf Hum Agent Interact. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2017. p. 443–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3125739.3132583.
Birnbaum GE, Mizrahi M, Hoffman G, Reis HT, Finkel EJ, Sass O. What robots can teach us about intimacy: the reassuring effects of robot responsiveness to human disclosure. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;63:416–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.064.
Birnbaum GE, Mizrahi M, Hoffman G, Reis HT, Finkel EJ, Sass O. Machines as a source of consolation: robot responsiveness increases human approach behavior and desire for companionship. 2016 11th ACM/IEEE Int Conf Human-Robot Interact. 2016. p. 165–72. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451748.
Björling EA, Rose E, Davidson A, Ren R, Wong D. Can we keep him forever? Teen’s engagement and desire for emotional connection with a social robot. Int J Soc Robot. 2019;12:65–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00539-6.
Hoffman G, Birnbaum GE, Vanunu K, Sass O, Reis HT. Robot Responsiveness to human disclosure affects social impression and appeal. Proc 2014 ACM/IEEE Int Conf Human-Robot Interact, vol. 2014. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. p. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559636.2559660.
Traeger ML, Sebo SS, Jung M, Scassellati B, Christakis NA. Vulnerable robots positively shape human conversational dynamics in a human–robot team. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2020;117:6370–5. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910402117.
Belpaeme T, Kennedy J, Ramachandran A, Scassellati B, Tanaka F. Social robots for education: a review. Sci Robot. 2018;3:eaat5954. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aat5954.
Čaić M, Mahr D, Oderkerken-Schröder G. Value of social robots in services: social cognition perspective. J Serv Mark. 2019;33:463–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-02-2018-0080.
Dawe J, Sutherland C, Barco A, Broadbent E. Can social robots help children in healthcare contexts? A scoping review. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2019;3:e000371. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2018-000371.
Johanson DL, Ahn HS, MacDonald BA, Ahn BK, Lim J, Hwang E, et al. The effect of robot attentional behaviors on user perceptions and behaviors in a simulated health care interaction: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21:e13667. https://doi.org/10.2196/13667.
Johanson DL, Ho SA, Sutherland CJ, Brown B, MacDonald BA, Jong YL, et al. Smiling and use of first-name by a healthcare receptionist robot: effects on user perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours. Paladyn J Behav Robot. 2020;11:40–51. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2020-0008.
Mubin O, Ahmad MI, Kaur S, Shi W, Khan A. Social robots in public spaces: a meta-review. In: Ge SS, Cabibihan J-J, Salichs MA, Broadbent E, He H, Wagner AR, et al., editors. Soc Robot. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. p. 213–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_21.
Aaltonen I, Arvola A, Heikkilä P, Lammi H. Hello Pepper, may i tickle you? Children’s and adults’ responses to an entertainment robot at a shopping mall. Proc Companion 2017 ACM/IEEE Int Conf Human-Robot Interact. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2017. p. 53–4. https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038362.
Stock R. M., Merkle M. Can humanoid service robots perform better than service employees? A comparison of innovative behavior cues. Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2018:10.
Yang C, Lu M, Tseng S, Fu L. A companion robot for daily care of elders based on homeostasis. 2017 56th Annu Conf Soc Instrum Control Eng Japan. 2017. p. 1401–6. https://doi.org/10.23919/SICE.2017.8105748.
Collins EC, Prescott TJ, Mitchinson B, Conran S. MIRO: a versatile biomimetic edutainment robot. Proc 12th Int Conf Adv Comput Entertain Technol. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1145/2832932.2832978.
Georgiou T, Singh K, Baillie L, Broz F. Small robots with big tasks: a proof of concept implementation using a MiRo for fall alert. companion 2020 ACM/IEEE Int Confuman-robot interact. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020. p. 206–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371382.3378331.
Crowe S. Jibo’s social robot assets acquired by NTT disruption [Internet]. Robot Rep. 2020. Available from: https://www.therobotreport.com/jibosocial-robot-assets-acquired-ntt-disruption/. Accessed 18 Mar 2020.
Carman A. Jibo, the social robot that was supposed to die, is getting a second life. The Verge 2020. Available from: https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/23/21325644/jibo-social-robot-ntt-disruptionfunding. Accessed 23 July 2020.
NTT Disruption. Jibo the social robot returns, with its brand new website - NTT DISRUPTION | Creating today what really matters for tomorrow. 2020. Available from: https://disruption.global.ntt/jibo-the-social-robot-returns-with-its-brand-new-website/. Accessed 23 July 2020.
Cifuentes CA, Pinto MJ, Céspedes N, Múnera M. Social robots in therapy and care. Curr Robot Rep. 2020;1:59–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43154-020-00009-2.
Villaronga EF, Kieseberg P, Li T. Humans forget, machines remember: artificial intelligence and the right to be forgotten. Comput Law Secur Rev. 2018;34:304–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2017.08.007.
Wullenkord R, Eyssel F. Societal and ethical issues in HRI. Curr Robot Rep. 2020;1:85–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43154-020-00010-9.
Alnajjar F, Khalid S, Vogan AA, Shimoda S, Nouchi R, Kawashima R. Emerging cognitive intervention technologies to meet the needs of an aging population: a systematic review. Front Aging Neurosci. 2019;11:291. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00291.
Assad-Uz-Zaman M, Rasedul Islam M, Miah S, Rahman MH. NAO robot for cooperative rehabilitation training. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. 2019;6:2055668319862151. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055668319862151.
Chen Y, Garcia-Vergara S, Howard AM. Effect of feedback from a socially interactive humanoid robot on reaching kinematics in children with and without cerebral palsy: a pilot study. Dev Neurorehabil. 2018;21:490–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/17518423.2017.1360962.
Mohebbi A. Human-robot interaction in rehabilitation and assistance: a review. Curr Robot Rep. 2020;1:131–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43154-020-00015-4.
• Robinson NL, Cottier TV, Kavanagh DJ. Psychosocial health interventions by social robots: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21:1–20. https://doi.org/10.2196/13203This systematic review of major randomized controlled trials done with social robots to date highlights how scant adequately powered and appropriately controlled research using social robots in health interventions currently is. It also provides important insights and recommendations for research using social robots in clinical settings to maximise efficacy.
Scoglio AAJ, Reilly ED, Gorman JA, Drebing CE. Use of social robots in mental health and well-being research: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21:e13322. https://doi.org/10.2196/13322.
Góngora Alonso S, Hamrioui S, de la Torre DI, Motta Cruz E, López-Coronado M, Franco M. Social robots for people with aging and dementia: a systematic review of literature. Telemed e-Health. 2018;25:533–40. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2018.0051.
Robinson H, MacDonald B, Kerse N, Broadbent E. The psychosocial effects of a companion robot: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013;14:661–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2013.02.007.
Hung L, Liu C, Woldum E, Au-Yeung A, Berndt A, Wallsworth C, et al. The benefits of and barriers to using a social robot PARO in care settings: a scoping review. BMC Geriatr. 2019;19:232. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1244-6.
Geva N, Uzefovsky F, Levy-Tzedek S. Touching the social robot PARO reduces pain perception and salivary oxytocin levels. Sci Rep. 2020;10:9814. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-66982-y.
da Silva J, Kavanagh DJ, Belpaeme T, Taylor L, Beeson K, Andrade J. Experiences of a motivational interview delivered by a robot: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20:e116. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7737.
Robinson NL, Connolly J, Hides L, Kavanagh DJ. Social robots as treatment agents: pilot randomized controlled trial to deliver a behavior change intervention. Internet Interv. 2020;21:100320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2020.100320.
Feingold Polak R, Tzedek SL. Social robot for rehabilitation: expert clinicians and post-stroke patients’ evaluation following a long-term intervention. Proc 2020 ACM/IEEE Int Conf Human-Robot Interact, vol. 2020. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. p. 151–60. https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374797.
Henschel A, Cross ES. The neuroscience of loneliness – and how technology is helping us [Internet]. Conversat. 2020. Available from: https://theconversation.com/the-neuroscience-of-loneliness-and-how-technology-is-helping-us-136093. Accessed 17 Apr 2020.
Yang G-Z, Nelson BJ, Murphy RR, Choset H, Christensen H, Collins SH, et al. Combating COVID-19—the role of robotics in managing public health and infectious diseases. Sci Robot. 2020;5:eabb5589. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.abb5589.
Hortensius R, Cross ES. From automata to animate beings: the scope and limits of attributing socialness to artificial agents. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018;1426:93–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13727.