AMIGO—A Socially Assistive Robot for Coaching Multimodal Training of Persons with Dementia

Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


In the context of assistive robotics in health care, we introduce the AMIGO system with its innovative “Coach” framework that uses social robots for the entertaining motivation of persons with dementia. The overarching objective is to empower persons with dementia to perform daily stimulating training activities within the concept of an integrated multimodal intervention. The “Coach” frame is complemented by a “Companion” frame that involves the client in a long-term relationship with the robot which will care by asking about the client’s health status, remind about important events or tasks, involve the client in dialog, invite the client to engage in multimodal training, and provide entertainment such as reading the news from all over the world. A research objective is to adjust Pepper’s dialog and motivation style based on emotional feedback sensed in interaction. The system will motivate the client to perform personalized exercises and to maintain and extend social bonds and will stimulate cognitive processes and physical activities. Sensors for eye tracking and motion analysis technologies will offer affordances for entertaining, sensorimotor sequences and for data capture and analysis of cognition and locomotion-specific behavioral parameters. Easily usable interfaces enable planning and autonomous daily practice to formal as well as to the informal caregiver in a weekly rhythm so that people with dementia can stay at home longer and the progress of dementia is slowed down. The AMIGO system is motivated from the viewpoint of health care, neuropsychology, and ICT systems. The first implementation of the prototype system and first results of a mixed-method study are presented in detail.


Dementia Home care Socially assistive robot (SAR) Motivation Cognitive training Physical training 



The research leading to these results has received funding from the Austrian BMVIT/FFG (No. 862051) by project AMIGO and project PLAYTIME of the AAL Programme of the European Union, by the Austrian BMVIT/FFG (No. 857334).


  1. Adbi, J., Al-Hindawi, A., Ng, T., & Vizcaychipi, M. P. (2018). Scoping review on the use of socially assistive robot technology in elderly care. BMJ Open, 12;8(2), e018815. Scholar
  2. ADI. (2013). World Alzheimer report 2013: Journey of caring: An analysis of long-term care for dementia. London, UK: ADI.Google Scholar
  3. ADI (World Alzheimer Report). (2018). The state of the art of dementia research: New frontiers. London, UK: Alzheimer’s Disease International.Google Scholar
  4. Alberts, J. W., Vastenburg, M. H., & Desmet, P. M. A. (2013). Mood expression by seniors in digital communication; evaluative comparison of four mood-reporting instruments with elderly users. In Proceedings of 5th International Congress of International Association of Societies of Design Research, Tokyo, Japan, 26–30 Aug 2013.Google Scholar
  5. Alzheimer’s Association. (2018). Alzheimer’s disease facts and figures. Alzheimer’s Dement, 14(3), 367–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baltrusaitis, T., Robinson, P., Morency, L. (2016). OpenFace: An open source facial behavior analysis tool. In Proceedings of Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV). IEEE.Google Scholar
  7. Bedaf, S., Gelderblom, G. J., Syrdal, D. S., Lehmann, H., Michel, H., Hewson, D., … de Witte L. (2013). Which activities threaten independent living of elderly when becoming problematic: Inspiration for meaningful service robot functionality. Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology, 9(6), 445–452.Google Scholar
  8. Bedarf, S., Draper, H., Gelderblom, G. J., Sorell, T., & De Witte, L. (2016). Can a service robot which supports independent living of older people disobey a command? The views of older people, informal carers and professional caregivers on the acceptability of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(3), 409–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bedarf, S., Gelderblom, G. J., & De Witte, L. (2015). Overview and categorization of robots supporting independent living of elderly people: What activities do they support and how far have they developed. Assistive Technology, 27(2), 88–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bekey, G., Ambrose, R., Kumar, V., Sanderson, A., Wilcox, B., & Zheng, Y. (2006). International assessment of research and development in robotics. Baltimore, Maryland: World Technology Evaluation Center (WTEC).Google Scholar
  11. Bioethics Commission. (2018). Roboter in der Betreuung alter Menschen - Stellungnahme der Bioethikkommission [Robots in the care of older people—statement of the Bioethics Commission]. Wien: Geschäftsstelle der Bioethikkommission.Google Scholar
  12. Boman, I. L., Lundberg, S., Starkhammar, S., & Nygård, L. (2014). Exploring the usability of a videophone mock-up for persons with dementia and their significant others. BMC Geriatrics, 14, 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Braunseis, F., Deutsch, T., Frese, T., & Sandholzer, H. (2012). The risk for nursing home admission did not change in ten years-a prospective cohort study with five-year follow-up. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 54, e63–e67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Buhtz, C., Paulicke, D., Hirt, J., Schwarz, K., Stoevesandt, D., Meyer, G., & Jahn, P. (2018). Robotic systems for care at home: A scoping review (article in German). Z. Evid. Fortbild. Qual. Gesundh. wesen. ISSN 1865-9217.Google Scholar
  15. Cao, Z., Simon, T., Wei, S.-E., Sheikh, Y. (2017). Realtime Multi-person 2D pose estimation using part affinity fields. In: Proceedings of CVPR 2017.Google Scholar
  16. Christofoletti, G., Oliani, M. M., Gobbi, S., Stella, F., Bucken Gobbi, L. T., & Renato Canineu, P. (2008). A controlled clinical trial on the effects of motor intervention on balance and cognition in institutionalized elderly patients with dementia. Clinical Rehabilitation, 22(7), 618–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dijkstra, A. (2017). Care dependency. In S. Schüssler & C. Lohrmann (Eds.), Dementia in nursing homes. Basel, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Feil-Seifer, D., & Matari, M. J. (2005). Defining socially assistive robotic. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, ICORR, June 28–July 1, Chicago, USA (pp. 465–468).
  19. Finn, M., & McDonald, S. (2011). Computerised cognitive training for older persons with mild cognitive impairment: A pilot study using a randomised controlled trial design. Brain Impairment, 12(3), 187–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Finnema, E., Dröes, R.-M., Ettema, T. P., & van Tilburg, W. (2005). The effect of integrated emotion-oriented care versus usual care on elderly persons with dementia in the nursing home and on nursing assistants: A randomized clinical trial. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 20(4), 330–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Forstmeier, S., & Maercker, A. (2015). Motivational processes in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease: Results from the Motivational Reserve in Alzheimer’s (MoReA) study. BMC Psychiatry, 15, 293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gregg, L., & Tarrier, N. (2007). Virtual reality in mental health. A review of the literature. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42(5), 343–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ienca, M., Jotterand, F., Elger, B., Caon, M., Scoccia Pappagallo, A., Kressig, R.W., & Wangmo, T. (2017). Intelligent assistive technology for Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias: A systematic review. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 56(4), 1301–1340. Scholar
  24. IFR. (2018). Executive summary world robotics 2018 service robots. IFR.Google Scholar
  25. Korczyn, A. D., Peretz, C., Aharonson, V., et al. (2007). Computer based cognitive training with CogniFit improved cognitive performance above the effect of classic computer games: prospective, randomized, double blind intervention study in the elderly. Alzheimer’s & Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association, 3(3), S171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kothgassner, O.D., Felnhofer, A., Hauk, N., Kasthofer, E., Gomm, J. & Kryspin-Exner, I. (2012). TUI: Technology Usage Inventory. Fragebogen und Manual. Wien: FFGGoogle Scholar
  27. Lauriks, S., Reinersmann, A., Van der Roest, H. G., Meiland, F. J., Davies, R. J., Moelaert, F., … Dröes, R. M. (2007). Review of ICT-based services for identified unmet needs in people with dementia. Ageing Res Review, 6, 223–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maercker, A., & Forstmeier, S. (2011). Healthy brain aging: The new concept of motivational reserve. Psychiatrist, 2011(35), 175–178.Google Scholar
  29. Mann, J. A., McDonald, B. A., Kuo, I. H., Li, X., & Broadbent, E. (2015). People respond better to robots than computer tablets delivering healthcare instructions. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 112–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mao, H. F., Chang, L. H., Yao, G., Chen, W. Y., & Huang, W. N. (2015). Indicators of perceived useful dementia care assistive technology: Caregivers’ perspectives. Geriatrics & Gerontology International, 15(8), 1049–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McCallum, S., Boletsis, C. (2013). Dementia games: A literature review of dementia-related serious games. In Serious games development and applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 8101, pp. 15–27). Springer.Google Scholar
  32. McDuff, D., El Kaliouby, R., Cohn, J. F., & Picard, R. W. (2015). Predicting ad liking and purchase intent: Large-scale analysis of facial responses to ads. Affective Computing, IEEE Transactions, 6(3), 223–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Montero-Odasso, M., Bherer, L., Studenski, S., Gopaul, K., Oteng-Amoako, A., Woolmore-Goodwin, S., et al. (2015). Mobility and cognition in seniors. Report from the 2008 institute of aging (CIHR) mobility and cognition workshop. Canadian Geriatrics Journal, 18(3), 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mordoch, E., Osterreicher, A., Guse, L., Roger, K., & Thompson, G. (2013). Use of social commitment robots in the care of elderly people with dementia: a literature review. Maturitas, 74,(1), 14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nordheim, J., Hamm, S., Kuhlmey, A., & Suhr, R. (2015). Tablet-PC und ihr Nutzen für demenzerkrankte Heimbewohner: Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Pilotstudie [Tablet computers and their benefits for nursing home residents with dementia: Results of a qualitative pilot study]. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 48, 543–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. OECD. (2015). Addressing Dementia—the OECD response. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Paletta, L., Lerch, A., Kemp, C., Pittino, L., Steiner, J., Panagl, M., et al. (2018a). Playful Multimodal training for persons with dementia with executive function based diagnostic tool. In Proceedings of Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA), Corfu, Greece, 26–29 June 2018. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  38. Paletta, L., Pszeida, M., Panagl, M. (2018b). Towards playful monitoring of executive functions: Deficits in inhibition control as indicator for cognitive impairment in first stages of Alzheimer. In: Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE 2018), Orlando, FL, 21–25 July 2018. Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Pessoa, L. (2009). How do emotion and motivation direct executive control? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 160–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pino, M., Boulay, M., Jouen, F., & Rigaud, A. S. (2015). Are we ready for robots that care for us?” Attitudes and opinions of older adults toward socially assistive robots. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 23(7), 141. Scholar
  41. Pripfl, J., Körtner, T., Batko-Klein, D., Hebesberger, D., Weninger, M., & Gisinger, C. (2016). Social service robots to support independent living: Experiences from a field trial. Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 49(4), 282–287. Scholar
  42. Robert Koch Institut. (2015). Gesundheit in Deutschland [Health in Germany], Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes - Gemeinsam getragen von RKI und Destatis. Berlin, Germany: RKI.Google Scholar
  43. Robert, P. H., Mulin, E., Malle, P., & David, R. (2010). Apathy diagnosis, assessment, and treatment in Alzheimer’s disease. In CNS neuroscience & therapeutics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  44. Rösler, U., Schmidt, K., Merda, M., & Melzer, M. (2018). Digitalisierung in der Pflege (Digitalization in nursing). Geschäftsstelle der Initiative Neue Qualität der Arbeit. Berlin, Germany: Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin.Google Scholar
  45. Rosseter, R. (2017). Fact sheet: Nursing shortage. Washington, DC, USA: AACN.Google Scholar
  46. Schüssler S. (2015). Care dependency and nursing care problems in nursing home residents with and without dementia (Doctoral thesis, Medical University of Graz, Austria).Google Scholar
  47. Shatil, E., Metzer, A., Horvitz, O., & Miller, A. (2010). Home-based personalized cognitive training in MS patients: A study of adherence and cognitive performance. Neuro Rehabilitation, 26(2), 143–153.Google Scholar
  48. Shipstead, Z., Hicks, K., & Engle, R. W. (2012). Cogmed working memory training: Does the evidence support the claims? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(3), 185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Smarr, C-A., Prakash, A., Beer, M., Mitzner, T. L., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2012). Older adults’ preferences for and acceptance of robot assistance for everyday living tasks. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual Meeting (Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 153–157). Scholar
  50. Softbank Robotics. (2015). Pepper—The world’s first personal robot that reads emotions. Softbank Rob.
  51. Span, M., Hettinga, M., Vernooij-Dassen, M., Eefsting, J., & Smits, C. (2013). Involving people with dementia in the development of supportive IT applications: A systematic review. Ageing Research Review, 12(2), 535–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spero, I. (Ed.) (2017). Neighbourhoods of the future—better homes for older adults—improving health, care, design and technology. In Agile ageing alliance. UK: McCarthy & Stone, CSL/RockCouture Productions Ltd.Google Scholar
  53. Starkstein, S. E., Jorge, R., Mizrahi, R. (2006). The prevalence, clinical correlates and treatment of apathy in Alzheimer’s disease. The European Journal of Psychiatry, 20(2), 96–106.Google Scholar
  54. Sugihara, T., Fujinami, T., Phaal, R., & Ikawa, Y. (2013). A technology roadmap of assistive technologies for dementia care in Japan. Dementia (London), 14(1), 80–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Toure-Tillery, M., & Fishbach, A. (2014). How to measure motivation: A guide for the experimental social psychologist. Social and Personality Psychology Compass.Google Scholar
  56. Wallenfels, M. (2016). Die Zukunft der Pflege durch Roboter. ProCare, 8, 42–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wang, R. H., Sudhama, A., Begum, M., Huq, R., & Mihailidis, A. (2016). Robots to assist daily activities: views of older adults with Alzheimer’s disease and their caregivers. International Psychogeriatrics, 29(1), 67–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. WHO. (2007). Fact sheet, Investing in the health workforce enables stronger health systems. WHO.Google Scholar
  59. Wilson, R. S., Schneider, J. A., Arnold, S. E., Bienias, J. L., & Bennett, D. A. (2007). Conscientiousness and the incidence of Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. Archives of General Psychiatry, 2007(64), 1204–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wu, Y. H., Wrobel, J., Cornuet, M., Kerhervé, H., Damnée, S., & Rigaud, A. S. (2014). Acceptance of an assistive robot in older adults: A mixed-method study of human-robot interaction over a 1-month period in the Living Lab setting. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 8(9), 801–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbHGrazAustria
  2. 2.Medical University of GrazGrazAustria
  3. 3.Sozialverein DeutschlandsbergDeutschlandsbergAustria
  4. 4.Humanizing Technologies GmbHViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations