MAIN MENUPREVIOUS MENU---------------------------------Search CD-ROMSearch ResultsPrintDefining Socially Assistive RoboticsDavid Feil-Seifer and Maja J Matari´cInteraction LaboratoryUniversity of Southern California941 West 37th Place, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0781{dfseifer|mataric}@usc.eduAbstract— This paper defines the research area of sociallyassistive robotics, focused on assisting people through socialinteraction. While much attention has been paid to robots thatprovide assistance to people through physical contact (whichwe call contact assistive robotics), and to robots that entertainthrough social interaction (social interactive robotics), so farthere is no clear definition of socially assistive robotics. We sum-marize active social assistive research projects and classify themby target populations, application domains, and interactionmethods. While distinguishing these from socially interactiverobotics endeavors, we discuss challenges and opportunities thatare specific to the growing field of socially assistive robotics.I. INTRODUCTIONThe field of socially assistive robotics is growing but hasnot yet been properly defined and circumscribed. There hasbeen significant attention given to and great progress made incontact assistive robotics. Yet it is crucial to note that hands-on assistive robotics is only part of the total compositionof assistive robotics. Currently there is no clear definition ofrobots that provide assistance through interaction and withoutphysical contact, namely socially assistive robotics. We beginby distinguishing these categories.A. Assistive RoboticsIn the past, assistive robotics (AR) has largely referred torobots that assisted people with physical disabilities throughphysical interaction. This definition is no longer appropriateas it is lacking in scope: it does not cover assistive robotsthat assist through non-contact interaction, such as those thatinteract with convalescent patients in a hospital or seniorcitizens in a nursing home.Assistive robotics itself has not been formally definedor surveyed. An adequate definition of an assistive robotis one that gives aid or support to a human user. Re-search into assistive robotics includes rehabilitation robots[6][9][18][20][26], wheelchair robots and other mobilityaides [1][16][34][38], companion robots [3][31][35], manip-ulator arms for the physically disabled [17][15][24], andeducational robots [21]. These robots are intended for usein a range of environments including schools, hospitals, andhomes.B. Socially Interactive RoboticsThe term socially interactive robotics (SIR) was firstused by Fong [14] to describe robots whose main taskwas some form of interaction. The term was introduced todistinguish social interaction from teleoperation in human-robot interaction (HRI). Fong conducted a survey of sociallyinteractive robots and evaluated them along social interactionprinciples, categorizing them by the aspects of social inter-action (speech, gestures, etc.) they used. Concerns regardinghuman perception of robotics, particularly the differencein social sophistication between humans and social robots,were addressed, and field studies, evaluation, and long-terminteraction were all noted as areas worthy of future research.C. Socially Assistive RoboticsWe define socially assistive robotics (SAR) as the intersec-tion of AR and SIR. SAR shares with assistive robotics thegoal to provide assistance to human users, but it specifiesthat the assistance is through social interaction. Becauseof the emphasis on social interaction, SAR has a similarfocus as SIR. In SIR, the robot’s goal is to develop closeand effective interactions with the human for the sake ofinteraction itself. In contrast, in SAR, the robot’s goal is tocreate close and effective interaction with a human user forthe purpose of giving assistance and achieving measurableprogress in convalescence, rehabilitation, learning, etc.The motivation for defining SAR is not to create a schismwithin SIR but rather to expand assistive robotics to includerobots that operate via social interaction and to better under-stand the key unique challenges of this growing field.In the following sections, we will discuss the motivationfor and the definition of socially assistive robotics. We willdefine a taxonomy of interaction components that augmentsthe definition of socially interactive robotics toward assistivedomains and uses. Finally, throughout the discussion, we willprovide a comprehensive summary of related work.II. MOTIVATIONThere is ample motivation to research SAR. There exists amultitude of important assistive tasks where social interactionrather than contact with the user is the central focus. Oneexample task domain we have studied is recovery post-stroke [12]. A variety of assistive robot manipulators [6][20]have been developed for post-stroke rehabilitation, whichphysically move the patient’s limbs as a form of physicaltherapy. However, Constraint Induced (CI) therapy [37],where a human therapist reminds and coaches a strokepatient to repeatedly use the affected limb(s), is recognizedto be one of the most effective rehabilitation methods. ThatProceedings of the 2005 IEEE9th International Conference on Rehabilitation RoboticsJune 28 - July 1, 2005, Chicago, IL, USA0-7803-9003-2/05/$20.00 ©2005 IEEEThP01-32465approach involves no physical contact between the patientand therapist, and thus presents an excellent candidate fora social assistive robot solution, as our other work hasdemonstrated [13]. By using their own limbs, patients learnmore generalizable skills and tend to exercise longer, usefulbehavior patterns [37]. The capability to encourage and trainsuch exercise activity can be employed beyond the strokedomain to other physical therapy fields.Another important motivation for SAR is the significantlydecreased safety risk in non-contact human-robot interaction.Because of this feature, systems are more easily tested anddeployed.III. TAXONOMIC DESCRIPTIONThe taxonomy defined by Fong [14] describes the in-teraction component of a socially interactive robot by thefollowing properties:A EmbodimentB EmotionC DialogD PersonalityE Human-oriented perceptionF User modelingG Socially situated learningH IntentionalityFor a socially assistive robot, additional properties need tobe added to the taxonomy definition, as follows:I. User PopulationsSocially assistive robots can address various populationsof users, ranging in age, impairment, and need. These