Co-design and Robots: A Case Study of a Robot Dog for Aging People

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9979)


The day-to-day experiences of aging citizens differ significantly from young, technologically savvy engineers. Yet, well-meaning engineers continue to design technologies for aging citizens, informed by skewed stereotypes of aging without deep engagements from these users. This paper describes a co-design project based on the principles of Participatory Design that sought to provide aging people with the capacity to co-design technologies that suit their needs. The project combined the design intuitions of both participants and designers, on equal footing, to produce a companion robot in the form of a networked robotic dog. Besides evaluating a productive approach that empowers aging people in the process of co-designing and evaluating technologies for themselves, this paper presents a viable solution that is playful and meaningful to these elderly people; capable of enhancing their independence, social agency and well-being.


Participatory design Co-design Robot dog Aging 


  1. 1.
    Alves-Oliveira, P., Petisca, S., Correia, F., Maia, N., Paiva, A.: Social robots for older adults: framework of activities for aging in place with robots. In: Tapus, A., André, E., Martin, J.-C., Ferland, F., Ammi, M. (eds.) Social Robotics. LNCS, vol. 9388, pp. 11–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahn, H.S., Kuo, I.-H., Datta, C., Stafford, R., Kerse, N., Peri, K., Broadbent, E., MacDonald, B.A.: Design of a kiosk type healthcare robot system for older people in private and public places. In: Brugali, D., Broenink, J.F., Kroeger, T., MacDonald, B.A. (eds.) SIMPAR 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8810, pp. 578–589. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-11900-7_49 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Australian Bureau of Statistics. Future Population Growth and Aging (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beer, J.M., Smarr, C.-A., Chen, T.L., Akanksha, P., Mitzner, T.L., Kemp, C.C., Rogers, W.A.: The domesticated robot: design guidelines for assisting older adults to age in place. In: Proceedings of Human Robot Interactions (HRI 2012), pp. 335–342 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carroll, J., Convertino, G., Farooq, U., Rosson, M.B.: The firekeepers: Aging considered as a resource. Inf. Soc. 11(1), 7–15 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Durick, J., Robertson, T., Brereton, M., Vetere., F, Nansen, B.: Dispelling aging myths in technology design. In: Proceedings of the 25th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference (OzCHI 2013), pp. 467–476 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Greenbaum, J., Kyng, M.: Design at work: Cooperative design of computer systems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, USA (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heelink, M.: Exploring the influence of age, gender, education and computer experience on robot acceptance by older adults. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI 2011), pp. 147–148 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jones, C.M., Demming, A.: Investigating emotional interaction with a robotic dog. In: Proceedings of the 19th Australasian conference on Computer-Human Interaction (OzCHI 2007), pp. 183–186 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khosla, R., Chu, M.-T., Kachouie, R., Yamada, K., Yamaguchi, T.: Embodying care in Matilda–an affective communication robot for the elderly in Australia. In: Proceedings of of the 2nd ACM SIGHIT International Health Informatics (IHI 2012), pp. 295–304 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kumahara, Y., More, Y.: Portable robot inspiring walking in elderly people. In: The Second International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction (HAI 2014), pp. 145–148 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lazar, A., Thompson, H.J., Piper, A.M., Demiris, G.: Rethinking the design of robotic pets for older adults. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, pp. 1034–1046 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leong, T.W., Robertson, T.: Voicing values: laying foundations for aging people to participate in design. In: Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Light, A., Leong, T.W., Robertson, T.: Ageing well with CSCW. In: Boulus-Rodje, N., Ellingsen, G., Bratteteig, T., Aanestad, M., Bjorn, P. (eds.) ECSCW 2015, pp. 295–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Melson, G., Khan, P.H., Beck, A.M., Friedman, B., Roberts, T., Garrett, E.: Robots as dogs? Children’s interaction with the robotic dog AIBO and a live Australian Shepherd. In: Proceedings of CHI 2005 EA Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1649–1652 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Prakash, A., Kemp, C.C., Rogers, W.A.: Older adults’ reactions to a robot’s appearance in the context of home use. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Robertson, T., Durick, J., Brereton, M., Vetere, F., Howard, S., Nansen, B.: Knowing our users: scoping interviews in design research with aging participants. In: Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference, pp, 517–520 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robertson, T., Leong, T.W., Durick, J., Koreshoff, T.: Mutual learning as a resource for research design. In: Proceedings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference (PDC 2014), pp. 25–28 (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Šabanović, S., Chang, W.-L., Bennett, C.C., Piatt, J.A., Hakken, D.: A robot of my own: participatory design of socially assistive robots for independently living older adults diagnosed with depression. In: Zhou, J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) ITAP 2015. LNCS, vol. 9193, pp. 104–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-20892-3_11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Simonsen, J., Robertson, T. (eds.): Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. Routledge, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Suchman, L.: Plans and situated actions: The problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge University Press, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vines, J., Pritchard, G., Wright, P., Olivier, P., Brittain, K.: An age old problem: examining the discourses of aging in hci and strategies for future research. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 22(1), 2 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wu, Y.-H., Wrobel, J., Cornuet, M., Damne Rigaud, A.-S.: 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. Clin. Interv. Aging 14(9), 801–811 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and ITUniversity of Technology SydneyUltimoAustralia

Personalised recommendations