Paro: The Perfect Pet?

Smrcka, Karel. “Mental-Commitment Robots for Psychological Enrichment.” Engineering News. Creamer Media, Ltd., 6 July 2007. Web. 23 April 2010 <http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/mentalcommitment-robots-for-psychological-enrichment-2007-07-06>.

Read this magazine

One of the most famous therapeutic robots is Paro, a robotic seal. It has even been included in the Guinness Book Of World Records. Paro was developed by Dr.Takanori Shibata for the purpose of having beneficial psychological, physiological, and social effects on humans. In his article, "Mental-Commitment Robots For Psychological Enrichment," Karel Smrcka not only describes the robot's complex features, but also points out why, in his view, robots like Paro are superior to live animals in the therapeutic treatment of the elderly. Paro is programmed to be incredibly life-like. It is more active during the day and seems to get sleepy at night. It has sensors that can detect "light, sound, touch, temperature and posture", so it seems to respond appropriately to its environment. It can move its legs and head, blink its eyes, and make "baby seal" sounds. Paro seems to react appropriately with surprise, discomfort, and pleasure depending on its interaction with people. The robot "learns" from positive and negative reinforcement and alters its behavior accordingly. It can "tell" whether it is being hit or petted, and pulls away shyly when its whiskers are touched. Because it has an electromagnetic shield, it can be used by patients with pacemakers. According to Smrcka, Paro has benefits that make it better than live animals for therapeutic interaction with elderly patients. Many nursing homes do not allow live animals and, with Paro, there is no concern about allergies, bites, scratches, or infection.

The benefits of using robots like Paro as described by Karel Smrcka are significant in the consideration of whether social robots should be used in therapeutic situations. It has long been acknowledged that patients benefit from contact with animals. It has been shown that psychologically, patients become more relaxed and motivated, physiologically, their vital signs improve, and socially, they become more communicative with the other patients and with care givers.According to Smrcka, if robots like Paro can produce the same positive results without the drawbacks of live animal therapy, they should be utilized. It seems to be significant that Paro is a baby seal, not an animal that patients have had prior experience with and may have preconceived ideas about like a dog or cat. According to Smrka, when these robots have been used in nursing homes and pediatric wards, the moods of the patients have noticably improved. In patients with dementia, neuronal activites in the brain as measured by EEGs have also improved. If Karel Smrcka is correct, sociable robots like Paro can be instrumental in the prevention of dementia. Smrcka does not address the risks of patients becoming emotionally attached to something that is not living, and one would need to determine if the risks of that attachment are outweighed by the tremendous benefits of interaction with robots like Paro, especially to elderly patients in nursing homes.

Robots That Relate

Breazeal, Cynthia. “Designing Social Robots.” Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 2002. <Print>.

Cynthia Breazeal is one of the pioneers in the field of "Sociable Robots". In the late 1990's, she worked at MIT in the Artificial Intelligence Lab and developed "Kismet", one of the first and most famous interactive robots. Breazeal's book not only describes the development of "Kismet", but also reveals Breazeal's hopes for the future of sociable robots. Kismet's lifelike design encouraged people to relate to him as if he were a living creature. Breazeal points out that not only can robots be made to look human-like, they can also be programmed to have human social characteristics. Her vision is that robots be used to enhance social interaction not only by being used in therapy sessions with patients like autistic children, but also by being used to enhance social interactions without ever actually interacting with humans. She had the idea that if robots could be programmed with human social characteristics, they could be observed interacting with each other. She wrote that "computational models of our social abilities could be implemented, tested, and analyzed on robots as they participate with each other in controlled social scenarios...and by studying them, researchers could better understand social behavior disorders and, in turn, develop effective treatments." Her book covers all the systems necessary to build a robot with human characteristics such as personality and empathy.

Cynthia Breazeal's point of view is worth paying attention to because she speaks with authority as one of the pioneers in the development of interactive robots. The fact that she is credited as the creator of "Kismet" qualifies her as an expert in the field of social robots. Her book contains insights not only into what it takes to build such robots, but also into possible uses for them. Regarding the question as to whether robots should be used in therapy because of the controversy over the effect they could have on human emotions and relationships. Breazeal agrees with those who say that robots used in therapy can enhance the ability of patients to relate to other humans.. She adds an interesting point to the discussion by putting forth the idea that, in addition to using robots to work directly with patients, researchers can also use robots to enhance human communication by observing robots interacting directly with each other. By observing robots in this way, researchers can learn about social patterns and disorders and help develop treatments for patients. In her book Breazeal writes that, "Robots should not supplant our need to interact with each other, but rather should support us in our quest to better understand ourselves so that we might appreciate, enhance and celebrate our humanity and our social lives." pxii.

Autism; Can Robots Help?

Wang, Val. “Robots To Fight Autism.” Popular Science Magazine 2009. Bonner Corporation, 10 April 2009. Web. 12 April 2010 <http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2009-04/robots-fight-autism>.

Read this magazine

Val Wang highlights recent developments in the field of interactive robots. She singles out several of the most prominent researchers in the field and describes their work. The first two researchers are Marek Micholowski, a Phd student in robotics at the Carnegie Mellon University, and Hideki Kozima of Miyagi of Japan. They are the keepers of a small yellow robot called Keepon. Keepon is one of the robots that is being used to study the social and emotional conditions of autistic children and to treat them by drawing them out socially. Because Keepon has no arms or legs and is small, it is not threatening to autistic children who are not comfortable with social interaction. Hidden cameras inside Keepon have documented the progress as autistic children gradually respond to Keepon's gentle nodding and bobbing and show amazing results. Another significant development has been made by the well-known researchers Maja Mataric and David Feil-Seifer who created a pair of robots; one that would blow bubbles randomly and one that would blow bubbles only when a child pressed a certain button. Their study showed consistently that when an autistic child could control the actions of the robot, he became more social, not only with the robot, but also with the researchers and his parents. The third research team Wang highlights is the team of Nilanjan Sarker, professor of mechanical engineering and Wendy Stone, leading autism researcher and professor of pediatrics at Vanderbilt University. They have developed a method using sensors of taking physiological measurements that can determine an autistic child's emotional state. The results can be used to pinpoint what triggers a child to withdraw, like eye contact, loud noises, or closeness to people. Robots can then be designed to help children build up a resistance to the triggers.

The information in the article is relevant to the question about whether using robots in therapy helps or hinders the patient's ability to relate to other human beings. It is clear from the evidence presented in the article that autistic children are helped by interaction with robots. These are children who have never shown the ability to relate socially with other people, but they begin to exhibit social behavior when they are dealing with robots. The studies with Keepon, for example, show children over a period of weeks going from not even being able to look at the robot to touching and kissing it, behavior that they have never even shown towards their parents. The results of the study with the bubble-blowing robot done by Mataric and Feil-Seifer, show improvement not only in the children's willingness to relate to the robot but also to the researchers and to their parents. The Vanderbilt professors' invention of sensors that measure an autistic child's emotional state can be very helpful in ensuring that the robots are being used appropriately with the patients. As a result of their work, robots can be programmed to gradually increase a stimulus to help build up tolerance to specific triggers and to back off when the child is becoming overwhelmed. That development will help ensure that the child is encouraged to continue to open up and not withdraw. This article is helpful in that it provides strong evidence for the idea that, at least in the cases involving autistic children, the use of robots in therapy enhances the ability of the patients' to relate to other human beings.

Rehabilitative Robots and How They Differ

Feil-Seifer, David., and Maja Mataric. “Defining Socially Assistive Robots.” Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE. University of Southern California, 1 July 2005. Web. 15 April 2010 <http://robotics.usc.edu/~maja/teaching/cs584/papers/feilseifer.pdf>.

Read this article

The stated purpose of this article is to provide the definition of Socially Assistive Robots (SAR's) and to distinguish between the different types of rehabilitative robots. As opposed to "Contact Assistive Robots" which assist through physical contact, and "Socially Interactive Robots" which are designed mainly to entertain, Socially Assistive Robots" (SAR's) are designed to "aid or support a human user" without making physical contact. "Contact Assistive Robots" that physically move the patients' limbs have been used a great deal in post-stroke patients, but the most effective therapy continues to be that in which a human therapist reminds and coaches the patient to "repeatedly use the affected limb". The authors believe that "Socially Assistive Robots" combine the positive aspects of both of those types of therapy without the downsides. Since SAR's do not physically touch the patients, the risk for injury is greatly reduced. Also, the patient's limb gets a better workout because the patient is doing the work instead of a "machine." A robot can have advantages over a human therapist in that it can be reprogrammed and reused, among other things. Through speech, gestures and direct input, SAR's can help with tasks such as tutoring, physical therapy, daily life assistance, and emotional expression. The authors see great potential for the use of SAR's with several populations of people including the elderly, people with physical impairments, people in convalescent care, people with cognitive disorders, and students.

This article is helpful on several levels for those who are asking the question, "In light of the controversy over the effects of sociable robots on human emotions and relationships, should therapists utilize robots with their patients?" In order to answer the question, one must have a clear understanding of how robots are being used and what types of people are receiving the therapy. The article clearly defines the different types of therapeutic robots and how they differ from one another. It also spells out the tasks that they perform and what groups of people are being treated with them. Since one of the authors of the article is Maja J. Mataric, the "brain" behind the development of therapeutic robots, it is an excellent source of information about the facts, benefits and possibilities of this type of therapy. While the article does not directly address the controversy about whether robotic therapy enhances or inhibits a person's ability to relate to humans, it does give an example of a situation in which robotic therapy enhances a patient's ability to interact socially with other humans. Autistic children and children facing cardiac illness who are reluctant to talk, are willing to create and act out stories with robots as a way of expressing their feelings. The article is valuable in that it lays the groundwork for intelligent discussion by providing information about how the therapy is conducted and by presenting the positive aspects of robotic therapy.