Tool UTAUT Applied to Measure Interaction Experience with NAO Robot

  • Adrián VegaEmail author
  • Kryscia Ramírez-BenavidezEmail author
  • Luis A. GuerreroEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11568)


This research described the utilization of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) to evaluate a high-level interactive scenario of using Nao Robot in the role of co-presenting in an educative context. Describing the registered result of construct such as Intention of Use, Perceived Enjoyment (PE), Perceived Sociability (PS), and Trust.

The study also describes the process of elaboration of this interaction. Multiple User-Centered Design techniques applied to the Human Interaction Robot field. Also, describes how the interaction of the robot with the participant was accomplished by using Wizard of Oz techniques.


Human and computer interaction User Centered Design User Experience Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Wizard of OZ Nao robot 



This work was supported by ECCI-UCR (Escuela de Ciencias de la Computación e Informática) and by CITIC-UCR (Centro de Investigaciones en Tecnologías de la Información y Comunicación) both at Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR). Grand No. 834-B7-267. Additionally, thanks to the User Interaction Group (USING) for providing ideas to refine and complete the research. Finally, thanks to the Fundación Fundamentes for the collaboration collection the data.


  1. 1.
    Oh, C.G., Park, J.: From mechanical metamorphosis to empathic interaction: a historical overview of robotic creatures. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 331(10) (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ramírez-Benavides, K., López, G., Guerrero, L.A.: Designing tools that allows children in the early childhood to program robots. In: Zaphiris, P., Ioannou, A. (eds.) LCT 2017. LNCS, vol. 10296, pp. 71–89. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bravo, F.A., González, A.M., González, E.: Interactive drama with robots for teaching non-technical subjects. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 6(2), 48–69 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baxter, P., Ashurst, E., Read, R., Kennedy, J., Belpaeme, T.: Robot education peers in a situated primary school study: Personalisation promotes child learning. PLoS ONE 12(5), 1–23 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Torta, E., Oberzaucher, J., Werner, F., Cuijpers, R.H., Juola, J.F.: Attitudes Towards Socially Assistive Robots in Intelligent Homes: Results From Laboratory Studies and Field Trials. J. Human-Robot Interact. 1(2), 76–99 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wood, L.J., Dautenhahn, K., Rainer, A., Robins, B., Lehmann, H., Syrdal, D.S.: Robot-mediated interviews - how effective is a humanoid robot as a tool for interviewing young children? PLoS ONE 8(3), e59448 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dautenhahn, K.: Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human-robot interaction. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 362(1480), 679–704 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fortunati, L.: Social robots from a human perspective. Soc. Robot Hum. Perspect. 73, 1–144 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dautenhahn, K.: Roles and functions of robots in human society: implications from research in autism therapy. Robotica 21(4), S0263574703004922 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vlachos, E., Jochum, E., Demers, L.-P.: The effects of exposure to different social robots on attitudes toward preferences. Interact. Stud. 17(3), 390–404 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Usability Body of Knowledge, “Wizard of Oz” (2012). Accessed 13 Apr 2017
  12. 12.
    Riek, L.D.: Wizard of Oz studies in HRI: a systematic review and new reporting guidelines. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 1(1), 119–136 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., Wielinga, B.: Measuring acceptance of an assistive social robot: a suggested toolkit. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 528–533 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oshlyansky, L., Cairns, P., Thimbleby, H.: Validating the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Tool Cross-CulturallyGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., Wielinga, B.: Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2(4), 361–375 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fundamentes, “¿Quienes somos?—Fundamentes” (2019). Accessed 11 Feb 2019

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidad de Costa RicaSan JoséCosta Rica

Personalised recommendations