Skip to main content

Exploring Active and Critical Engagement in Human-Robot Interaction to Develop Programming Skills: A Pilot Study

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Design, User Experience, and Usability (HCII 2023)


Humanoid robots can help improve the spatial programming skills of children by making abstract concepts playful, tangible, concrete, and thereby understandable. However, active and critical engagement with robots creates its own challenges, originating from participants or robots. In this study, we explored to what extent programming a humanoid robot is engaging when the robot helps visualize the coding, instructions, and outcome of the process. The results of the study showed that a teaching session before the experiment was helpful, even though participants had previous experience programming with robots. The participants found programming the robot more enjoyable when compared to programming on a PC. They believed that robots could be useful as learning companions under the guidance of a regular teacher to improve their programming skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions


  1. Abe, K., et al.: Toward playmate robots that can play with children considering personality. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Human-agent Interaction, pp. 165–168 (2014).

  2. Ahmad, M.I., Mubin, O., Orlando, J.: Adaptive social robot for sustaining social engagement during long-term children-robot interaction. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 33(12), 943–962 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alves-Oliveira, P., Sequeira, P., Paiva, A.: The role that an educational robot plays. In: Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), pp. 817–822 (2016).

  4. Angeli, C., et al.: A K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: implications for teacher knowledge. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 19(3), 47–57 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Arthur, L.: The early years learning framework: building confident learners. Early Childhood Australia (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Benitti, F.B.V.: Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: a systematic review. Comput. Educ. 58(3), 978–988 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Benvenuti, M., Mazzoni, E.: Enhancing wayfinding in pre-school children through robot and socio-cognitive conflict. Br. J. Edu. Technol. 51(2), 436–458 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bers, M.U., González-González, C., Armas-Torres, M.B.: Coding as a playground: promoting positive learning experiences in childhood classrooms. Comput. Educ. 138, 130–145 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chalmers, C., Keane, T., Boden, M., Williams, M.: Humanoid robots: programing at school. In: Proceedings of the 5th International STEM in Education Conference: Integrated Education for the Real World (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Corral, J.M.R., Ruiz-Rube, I., Balcells, A.C., Mota-Macías, J.M., Morgado-Estévez, A., Dodero, J.M.: A study on the suitability of visual languages for non-expert robot programmers. IEEE Access 7, 17535–17550 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Di Lieto, M.C., et al.: Educational robotics intervention on executive functions in preschool children: a pilot study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 71, 16–23 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Diyas, Y., Brakk, D., Aimambetov, Y., Sandygulova, A.: Evaluating peer versus teacher robot within educational scenario of programming learning. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pp. 425–426 (2016).

  13. Edwards, A., Edwards, C., Westerman, D., Spence, P.R.: Initial expectations, interactions, and beyond with social robots. Comput. Hum. Behav. 90, 308–314 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Keane, T., Chalmers, C., Boden, M., Williams, M.: Humanoid robots: learning a programming language to learn a traditional language. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 28(5), 533–546 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kanero, J., Geçkin, V., Oranç, C., Mamus, E., Küntay, A.C., Göksun, T.: Social robots for early language learning: current evidence and future directions. Child Dev. Perspect. 12(3), 146–151 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kanero, J., Oranç, C., Koşkulu, S., Kumkale, G.T., Göksun, T., Küntay, A.C.: Are tutor robots for everyone? The influence of attitudes, anxiety, and personality on robot-led language learning. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 14(2), 297–312 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kennedy, J., Baxter, P., Belpaeme, T.: The robot who tried too hard: social behaviour of a robot tutor can negatively affect child learning. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pp. 67–74 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kolb, D.A.: Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall International, Upper Saddle River (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Manzi, F., Massaro, D., Di Lernia, D., Maggioni, M.A., Riva, G., Marchetti, A.: Robots are not all the same: young adults’ expectations, attitudes, and mental attribution to two humanoid social robots. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 24(5), 307–314 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Michaelis, J.E., Mutlu, B.: Someone to read with: design of and experiences with an in-home learning companion robot for reading. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 301–312 (2017).

  21. Mioduser, D., Levy, S.T.: Making sense by building sense: kindergarten children’s construction and understanding of adaptive robot behaviors. Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn. 15(2), 99–127 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mishra, D., Parish, K., Lugo, R.G., Wang, H.: A framework for using humanoid robots in the school learning environment. Electronics 10(6), 756 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Moors, L., Sheehan, R.: Aiding the transition from novice to traditional programming environments. In: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 509–514 (2017).

  24. Prakash, A., Rogers, W.A.: Why some humanoid faces are perceived more positively than others: effects of human-likeness and task. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7(2), 309–331 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Strawhacker, A., Bers, M.U.: “I want my robot to look for food”: comparing kindergartner’s programming comprehension using tangible, graphic, and hybrid user interfaces. Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ. 25(3), 293–319 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Subedi, A., Pandey, D., Mishra, D.: Programming Nao as an educational agent: a comparison between Choregraphe and Python SDK. In: Ben Ahmed, M., Boudhir, A.A., Karaș, İR., Jain, V., Mellouli, S. (eds.) SCA 2021. LNNS, vol. 393, pp. 367–377. Springer, Cham (2022).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Sullivan, A., Elkin, M., Bers, M.U.: KIBO robot demo: engaging young children in programming and engineering. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 418–421 (2015).

  28. Toh, L.P.E., Causo, A., Tzuo, P.W., Chen, I.M., Yeo, S.H.: A review on the use of robots in education and young children. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 19(2), 148–163 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tokmurzina, D., Sagitzhan, N., Nurgaliyev, A., Sandygulova, A.: Exploring child-robot proxemics. In: Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, pp. 257–258 (2018).

  30. Turner, S., Hill, G.: Robotics within the teaching of problem-solving. Innov. Teach. Learn. Inf. Comput. Sci. 7(1), 108–119 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zaga, C., Lohse, M., Truong, K.P., Evers, V.: The effect of a robot’s social character on children’s task engagement: peer versus tutor. In: Tapus, A., André, E., Martin, J.C., Ferland, F., Ammi, M. (eds.) Social Robotics. ICSR 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol. 9388. Springer, Cham (2015).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deepti Mishra .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Mishra, D., Inal, Y., Parish, K., Romero, G.A., Rajbhandari, R. (2023). Exploring Active and Critical Engagement in Human-Robot Interaction to Develop Programming Skills: A Pilot Study. In: Marcus, A., Rosenzweig, E., Soares, M.M. (eds) Design, User Experience, and Usability. HCII 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14033. Springer, Cham.

Download citation

  • DOI:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-35707-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-35708-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics