Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3568162.3576993acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshriConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Get SMART: Collaborative Goal Setting with Cognitively Assistive Robots

Published: 13 March 2023 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    Many robot-delivered health interventions aim to support people longitudinally at home to complement or replace in-clinic treatments. However, there is little guidance on how robots can support collaborative goal setting (CGS). CGS is the process in which a person works with a clinician to set and modify their goals for care; it can improve treatment adherence and efficacy. However, for home-deployed robots, clinicians will have limited availability to help set and modify goals over time, which necessitates that robots support CGS on their own. In this work, we explore how robots can facilitate CGS in the context of our robot CARMEN (Cognitively Assistive Robot for Motivation and Neurorehabilitation), which delivers neurorehabilitation to people with mild cognitive impairment (PwMCI). We co-designed robot behaviors for supporting CGS with clinical neuropsychologists and PwMCI, and prototyped them on CARMEN. We present feedback on how PwMCI envision these behaviors supporting goal progress and motivation during an intervention. We report insights on how to support this process with home-deployed robots and propose a framework to support HRI researchers interested in exploring this both in the context of cognitively assistive robots and beyond. This work supports designing and implementing CGS on robots, which will ultimately extend the efficacy of robot-delivered health interventions.

    Supplementary Material

    MP4 File (HRI 2023.mp4)
    Kubota, A., Pei, R., Sun, E., Cruz-Sandoval, D., Kim, S., and Riek, L.D. "Get SMART: Collaborative Goal Setting with Cognitively Assistive Robots." In Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM/IEEE Conference on Human Robot Interaction (HRI). 2023. Presentation video.

    References

    [1]
    P. Alves-Oliveira, M. Bavier, S. Malandkar, R. Eldridge, J. Sayigh, E. A. Björling, and M. Cakmak. Flexi: A robust and flexible social robot embodiment kit. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference, pages 1177--1191, 2022.
    [2]
    E. Arnáiz and O. Almkvist. Neuropsychological features of mild cognitive impairment and preclinical alzheimer's disease. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 107:34--41, 2003.
    [3]
    J. R. Banas, S. Magasi, K. The, and D. E. Victorson. Recruiting and retaining people with disabilities for qualitative health research: Challenges and solutions. Qualitative Health Research, 29(7):1056--1064, 2019.
    [4]
    A. S. Bhat, C. Boersma, M. J. Meijer, M. Dokter, E. Bohlmeijer, and J. Li. Plant robot for at-home behavioral activation therapy reminders to young adults with depression. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI), 10(3):1--21, 2021.
    [5]
    G. Binarelli, F. Joly, L. Tron, S. Lefevre Arbogast, and M. Lange. Management of cancer-related cognitive impairment: A systematic review of computerized cognitive stimulation and computerized physical activity. Cancers, 13(20):5161, 2021.
    [6]
    E. A. Björling, H. Ling, S. Bhatia, and K. Dziubinski. The experience and effect of adolescent to robot stress disclosure: A mixed-methods exploration. In International conference on social robotics, pages 604--615. Springer, 2020.
    [7]
    E. A. Björling and L. D. Riek. Designing for exit: How to let robots go. Proceedings of We Robot, 2022.
    [8]
    E. A. Björling, E. Rose, A. Davidson, R. Ren, and D. Wong. Can we keep him forever? teens' engagement and desire for emotional connection with a social robot. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12(1):65--77, 2020.
    [9]
    T. J. Bovend'Eerdt, R. E. Botell, and D. T. Wade. Writing smart rehabilitation goals and achieving goal attainment scaling: a practical guide. Clinical rehabilitation, 23(4):352--361, 2009.
    [10]
    V. Braun and V. Clarke. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2):77--101, 2006.
    [11]
    V. Braun and V. Clarke. Thematic analysis. American Psychological Association, 2012.
    [12]
    V. Braun and V. Clarke. One size fits all? what counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative research in psychology, 18(3):328--352, 2021.
    [13]
    A. Brigden, E. Anderson, C. Linney, R. Morris, R. Parslow, T. Serafimova, L. Smith, E. Briggs, M. Loades, E. Crawley, et al. Digital behavior change interventions for younger children with chronic health conditions: systematic review. Journal of medical Internet research, 22(7):e16924, 2020.
    [14]
    M. L. Cohen, A. C. Ryan, A. M. Lanzi, et al. Prevention of and early intervention for cognitive decline due to alzheimer's disease and related disorders. Delaware Journal of Public Health, 7(4):118, 2021.
    [15]
    S. Consolvo, P. Klasnja, D. W. McDonald, and J. A. Landay. Goal-setting considerations for persuasive technologies that encourage physical activity. In Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology, pages 1--8, 2009.
    [16]
    D. Cruz-Sandoval, A. Morales-Tellez, E. B. Sandoval, and J. Favela. A social robot as therapy facilitator in interventions to deal with dementia-related behavioral symptoms. In 2020 15th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pages 161--169. IEEE, 2020.
    [17]
    E. Deng, B. Mutlu, M. J. Matarić, et al. Embodiment in socially interactive robots. Foundations and Trends® in Robotics, 7(4):251--356, 2019.
    [18]
    C. Di Lorito, A. Bosco, H. Rai, M. Craven, D. McNally, C. Todd, V. Booth, A. Cowley, L. Howe, and R. H. Harwood. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis on digital health interventions for people living with dementia and mild cognitive impairment. International journal of geriatric psychiatry, 2022.
    [19]
    J. J. Evans. Goal setting during rehabilitation early and late after acquired brain injury. Current opinion in neurology, 25(6):651--655, 2012.
    [20]
    S. I. Gray, J. Robertson, A. Manches, and G. Rajendran. Brainquest: The use of motivational design theories to create a cognitive training game supporting hot executive function. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 127:124--149, 2019.
    [21]
    C. Guan, A. Bouzida, R. M. Oncy-Avila, S. Moharana, and L. D. Riek. Taking an (embodied) cue from community health: Designing dementia caregiver support technology to advance health equity. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1--16, 2021.
    [22]
    D. V. Gunasekeran, R. M. W. W. Tseng, Y.-C. Tham, and T. Y. Wong. Applications of digital health for public health responses to covid-19: a systematic scoping review of artificial intelligence, telehealth and related technologies. NPJ digital medicine, 4(1):1--6, 2021.
    [23]
    A. Huber, A. Weiss, and M. Rauhala. The ethical risk of attachment how to identify, investigate and predict potential ethical risks in the development of social companion robots. In 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pages 367--374. IEEE, 2016.
    [24]
    M. Huckans, L. Hutson, E. Twamley, A. Jak, J. Kaye, and D. Storzbach. Efficacy of cognitive rehabilitation therapies for mild cognitive impairment (mci) in older adults: working toward a theoretical model and evidence-based interventions. Neuropsychology review, 23(1):63--80, 2013.
    [25]
    M. Huckans, E. Twamley, S.-M. Tun, L. Hutson, S. Noonan, G. Savla, A. Jak, D. Schiehser, and D. Storzbach. Compensatory cognitive training for mild cognitive impairment. UCSD, 2019.
    [26]
    M. Ienca and E. Fosch-Villaronga. Privacy and security issues in assistive technologies for dementia. Intelligent Assistive Technologies for Dementia: Clinical, Ethical, Social, and Regulatory Implications, page 221, 2019.
    [27]
    K. Jekel, M. Damian, C. Wattmo, L. Hausner, R. Bullock, P. J. Connelly, B. Dubois, M. Eriksdotter, M. Ewers, E. Graessel, et al. Mild cognitive impairment and deficits in instrumental activities of daily living: a systematic review. Alzheimer's research & therapy, 7(1):1--20, 2015.
    [28]
    S. Jeong, S. Alghowinem, L. Aymerich-Franch, K. Arias, A. Lapedriza, R. Picard, H. W. Park, and C. Breazeal. A robotic positive psychology coach to improve college students' wellbeing. In 2020 29th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), pages 187--194. IEEE, 2020.
    [29]
    S. Jeong, L. Aymerich-Franch, K. Arias, S. Alghowinem, A. Lapedriza, R. Picard, H. W. Park, and C. Breazeal. Deploying a robotic positive psychology coach to improve college students' psychological well-being. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, pages 1--45, 2022.
    [30]
    C. D. Kidd and C. Breazeal. Robots at home: Understanding long-term human-robot interaction. In 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pages 3230--3235. IEEE, 2008.
    [31]
    A. Kubota, D. Cruz-Sandoval, S. Kim, E. W. Twamley, and L. D. Riek. Cognitively assistive robots at home: Hri design patterns for translational science. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pages 53--62, 2022.
    [32]
    A. Kubota, E. I. Peterson, V. Rajendren, H. Kress-Gazit, and L. D. Riek. Jessie: Synthesizing social robot behaviors for personalized neurorehabilitation and beyond. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, pages 121--130, 2020.
    [33]
    A. Kubota, M. Pourebadi, S. Banh, S. Kim, and L. Riek. Somebody that i used to know: The risks of personalizing robots for dementia care. Proceedings of We Robot, 2021.
    [34]
    A. Kubota and L. D. Riek. Methods for robot behavior adaptation for cognitive neurorehabilitation. Annual review of control, robotics, and autonomous systems, 5:109--135, 2022.
    [35]
    E. Leach, P. Cornwell, J. Fleming, and T. Haines. Patient centered goal-setting in a subacute rehabilitation setting. Disability and rehabilitation, 32(2):159--172, 2010.
    [36]
    J. Li. The benefit of being physically present: A survey of experimental works comparing copresent robots, telepresent robots and virtual agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 77:23--37, 2015.
    [37]
    J. Lumsden, E. A. Edwards, N. S. Lawrence, D. Coyle, M. R. Munafò, et al. Gamification of cognitive assessment and cognitive training: a systematic review of applications and efficacy. JMIR serious games, 4(2):e5888, 2016.
    [38]
    Z. Mahmood, R. Van Patten, A. V. Keller, H. C. Lykins, D. Perivoliotis, E. Granholm, and E. W. Twamley. Reducing negative symptoms in schizophrenia: Feasibility and acceptability of a combined cognitive-behavioral social skills training and compensatory cognitive training intervention. Psychiatry Research, 295:113620, 2021.
    [39]
    D. Martinho, J. Carneiro, J. M. Corchado, and G. Marreiros. A systematic review of gamification techniques applied to elderly care. Artificial Intelligence Review, 53(7):4863--4901, 2020.
    [40]
    M. Matamala-Gomez, S. Bottiroli, O. Realdon, G. Riva, L. Galvagni, T. Platz, G. Sandrini, R. De Icco, and C. Tassorelli. Telemedicine and virtual reality at time of covid-19 pandemic: an overview for future perspectives in neurorehabilitation. Frontiers in Neurology, 12:646902, 2021.
    [41]
    S. Matsumoto, S. Moharana, N. Devanagondi, L. C. Oyama, and L. D. Riek. Iris: A low-cost telemedicine robot to support healthcare safety and equity during a pandemic. In International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, pages 113--133. Springer, 2022.
    [42]
    C. McClain. Collaborative rehabilitation goal setting. Topics in stroke rehabilitation, 12(4):56--60, 2005.
    [43]
    N. McDonald, S. Schoenebeck, and A. Forte. Reliability and inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: Norms and guidelines for cscw and hci practice. Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 3(CSCW):1--23, 2019.
    [44]
    S. E. Mengoni, K. Irvine, D. Thakur, G. Barton, K. Dautenhahn, K. Guldberg, B. Robins, D. Wellsted, and S. Sharma. Feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial to investigate the effectiveness of using a humanoid robot to improve the social skills of children with autism spectrum disorder (kaspar rct): A study protocol. BMJ open, 7(6):e017376, 2017.
    [45]
    A. Mora, C. González, J. Arnedo-Moreno, and A. Álvarez. Gamification of cognitive training: a crowdsourcing-inspired approach for older adults. In Proceedings of the XVII International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, pages 1--8, 2016.
    [46]
    W. H. Organization et al. Global action plan on the public health response to dementia 2017--2025. 2017.
    [47]
    G. Peeters, I. L. Black, S. R. Gomersall, J. Fritschi, A. Sweeney, Y. Guedes de Oliveira, R. Panizzutti, C. T. McEvoy, and A. Lampit. Behaviour change techniques in computerized cognitive training for cognitively healthy older adults: A systematic review. Neuropsychology Review, pages 1--17, 2022.
    [48]
    T. J. Philippe, N. Sikder, A. Jackson, M. E. Koblanski, E. Liow, A. Pilarinos, and K. Vasarhelyi. Digital health interventions for delivery of mental health care: Systematic and comprehensive meta-review. JMIR Mental Health, 9(5):e35159, 2022.
    [49]
    M. Pourebadi and L. D. Riek. Facial expression modeling and synthesis for patient simulator systems: Past, present, and future. ACM Transactions on Computing for Healthcare (HEALTH), 3(2):1--32, 2022.
    [50]
    S. Reig, M. Luria, E. Forberger, I. Won, A. Steinfeld, J. Forlizzi, and J. Zimmerman. Social robots in service contexts: Exploring the rewards and risks of personalization and re-embodiment. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021, pages 1390--1402, 2021.
    [51]
    D. B. Reuben and M. E. Tinetti. Goal-oriented patient care--an alternative health outcomes paradigm. The New England journal of medicine, 366(9):777, 2012.
    [52]
    B. Robins, K. Dautenhahn, R. T. Boekhorst, and A. Billard. Robotic assistants in therapy and education of children with autism: can a small humanoid robot help encourage social interaction skills? Universal access in the information society, 4(2):105--120, 2005.
    [53]
    S. Sabanović, C. C. Bennett, W.-L. Chang, and L. Huber. Paro robot affects diverse interaction modalities in group sensory therapy for older adults with dementia. In 2013 IEEE 13th international conference on rehabilitation robotics (ICORR), pages 1--6. IEEE, 2013.
    [54]
    B. Scassellati, L. Boccanfuso, C.-M. Huang, M. Mademtzi, M. Qin, N. Salomons, P. Ventola, and F. Shic. Improving social skills in children with asd using a long-term, in-home social robot. Science Robotics, 3(21):eaat7544, 2018.
    [55]
    C. Strubbia, W. M. Levack, R. Grainger, K. Takahashi, K. Tomori, et al. Use of an ipad app (aid for decision-making in occupational choice) for collaborative goal setting in interprofessional rehabilitation: Qualitative descriptive study. JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 8(4):e33027, 2021.
    [56]
    A. Taylor, M. Murakami, S. Kim, R. Chu, and L. Riek. Hospitals of the future: Designing interactive robotic systems for resilient emergency departments. 2022.
    [57]
    D. R. Thomas. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American journal of evaluation, 27(2):237--246, 2006.
    [58]
    M. M. Tizuka, E. W. G. Clua, and L. C. de Castro Salgado. Investigating m-health gamification rewards elements for adults 50+. In 2020 IEEE 8th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), pages 1--8. IEEE, 2020.
    [59]
    L. Turner-Stokes. Goal attainment scaling (gas) in rehabilitation: a practical guide. Clinical rehabilitation, 23(4):362--370, 2009.
    [60]
    L. Turner-Stokes, H. Rose, S. Ashford, and B. Singer. Patient engagement and satisfaction with goal planning: Impact on outcome from rehabilitation. International Journal of Therapy & Rehabilitation, 22(5), 2015.
    [61]
    S. C. van de Weijer, M. L. Kuijf, N. M. de Vries, B. R. Bloem, and A. A. Duits. Do-it-yourself gamified cognitive training. JMIR Serious Games, 7(2):e12130, 2019.
    [62]
    D. T. Wade. Goal setting in rehabilitation: an overview of what, why and how. Clinical rehabilitation, 23(4):291--295, 2009.
    [63]
    S. Wilhelm, H. Weingarden, J. L. Greenberg, T. H. McCoy, I. Ladis, B. J. Summers, A. Matic, and O. Harrison. Development and pilot testing of a cognitive-behavioral therapy digital service for body dysmorphic disorder. Behavior therapy, 51(1):15--26, 2020.
    [64]
    F. Yuan, E. Klavon, Z. Liu, R. P. Lopez, and X. Zhao. A systematic review of robotic rehabilitation for cognitive training. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8:605715, 2021

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Social Robots in Healthcare: Characterizing Privacy ConsiderationsCompanion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610978.3640713(568-572)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
    • (2024)CARMEN: A Cognitively Assistive Robot for Personalized Neurorehabilitation at HomeProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610977.3634971(55-64)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    HRI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
    March 2023
    631 pages
    ISBN:9781450399647
    DOI:10.1145/3568162
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 13 March 2023

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. collaborative goal setting
    2. digital health interventions
    3. healthcare robotics
    4. human robot interaction
    5. neurorehabilitation
    6. robotics

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • National Science Foundation

    Conference

    HRI '23
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 268 of 1,124 submissions, 24%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)503
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)87
    Reflects downloads up to 11 Aug 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Social Robots in Healthcare: Characterizing Privacy ConsiderationsCompanion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610978.3640713(568-572)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
    • (2024)CARMEN: A Cognitively Assistive Robot for Personalized Neurorehabilitation at HomeProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610977.3634971(55-64)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024

    View Options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Get Access

    Login options

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media