Emotional and Behavioural Distraction by a Social Robot for Children Anxiety Reduction During Vaccination | International Journal of Social Robotics Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Emotional and Behavioural Distraction by a Social Robot for Children Anxiety Reduction During Vaccination

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social Assistive Robots are starting to be widely used for paediatric health-care. In this setting, the development of effective strategies to engage and remain compelling during the interaction is still an open research area since, in the case of an incoming medical procedure, children could be in an anxiety state. In this work, the proposed strategy relies on the use of a social robot interacting with the children and applying distraction strategies that are used in human–human interaction. Additionally, the robot displays emotional behaviours to attract the children attention. We present the results of a 2 months study (N = 139) conducted in a Health-Vaccines Centre, where the effects of the distraction provided by a social robot, showing such interactive behaviours interleaved with emotional ones, are compared with the same distracting strategies without any emotional social cues and with the case without the robot. Such emotional behaviours are selected with a positive or negative valence according to the initial anxiety state of the children (e.g., low or high). Outcome criteria for the evaluation of the intervention included the parents reported fear, anxiety and happiness at different stages of the interaction, self-report of the perceived pain, and an external behavioural evaluation of the pain. Results showed that the robot distraction strategies were able to reduce fear and anxiety, and increase happiness in every condition. Moreover, children perceived less pain with respect to the case of no robot. Finally, results showed that the initial children anxiety has an impact on the ability of the robot to be engaging.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bar-Haim Y, Lamy D, Pergamin L, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, van IJzendoorn MH (2007) Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: a meta-analytic study. Psychol Bull 133(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Beran TN, Ramirez-Serrano A, Vanderkooi OG, Kuhn S (2013) Reducing children’s pain and distress towards flu vaccinations: a novel and effective application of humanoid robotics. Vaccine 31(25):2772–2777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Beran TN, Ramirez-Serrano A, Vanderkooi OG, Kuhn S (2015) Humanoid robotics in health care: an exploration of children’s and parents’ emotional reactions. J Health Psychol 20(7):984–989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen LL (2008) Behavioral approaches to anxiety and pain management for pediatric venous access. Pediatrics 122(Supplement 3):S134–S139. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2008-1055f

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dahlquist L, Pendley J, Landthrip D, Jones C, Steuber C (2002) Distraction intervention for preschoolers undergoing intramuscular injections and subcutaneous port access. Health Psychol Off J Div Health Psychol Am Psychol Assoc 21:94–9

    Google Scholar 

  7. DeMore M, Cohen LL (2005) Distraction for pediatric immunization pain: a critical review. J Clin Psychol Med Settings 12(4):281–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fischer K, Yang S, Mok B, Maheshwari R, Sirkin D, Ju W (2015) Initiating interactions and negotiating approach: a robotic trash can in the field. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, pp 10–16

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fridin M (2014) Kindergarten social assistive robot: first meeting and ethical issues. Comput Hum Behav 30:262–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Greczek J, Matarić M (2015) Toward personalized pain anxiety reduction for children. In: AAAI fall symposium on artificial intelligence and human–robot interaction. IEEE, Arlington

  11. Hearst D (2015) Non-pharmacological distraction techniques as sedation adjunct. Springer, New York, pp 655–674

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hajcak G, Dennis TA (2009) Brain potentials during affective picture processing in children. Biol Psychol 80(3):333–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jeong S, Breazeal C, Logan D, Weinstock P (2018) Huggable: the impact of embodiment on promoting socio-emotional interactions for young pediatric inpatients. In: Proceedings of the CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI’18. ACM, New York, pp 495:1–495:13

  14. Jeong S, Logan DE, Goodwin MS, Graca S, O’Connell B, Goodenough H, Anderson L, Stenquist N, Fitzpatrick K, Zisook M, Plummer L, Breazeal C, Weinstock P (2015) A social robot to mitigate stress, anxiety, and pain in hospital pediatric care. In: Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction extended abstracts, HRI’15 extended abstracts. ACM, New York, pp 103–104

  15. Jibb LA, Birnie KA, Nathan PC, Beran TN, Hum V, Victor JC, Stinson JN (2018) Using the mediport humanoid robot to reduce procedural pain and distress in children with cancer: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Blood Cancer 65(9):e27242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jimenez F, Yoshikawa T, Furuhashi T, Kanoh M (2015) An emotional expression model for educational-support robots. J Artif Intell Soft Comput Res 5(1):51–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kahneman D (1973) Attention and effort. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kanda T, Hirano T, Eaton D, Ishiguro H (2004) Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: a field trial. Hum Comput Interact 19(1):61–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. LeDoux JE (1995) Emotion: clues from the brain. Annu Rev Psychol 46(1):209–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mann JA, MacDonald BA, Kuo IH, Li X, Broadbent E (2015) People respond better to robots than computer tablets delivering healthcare instructions. Comput Hum Behav 43(C):112–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mccaul K, Malott JM (1984) Distraction and coping with pain. Psychol Bull 95(3):516–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McClure E, Monk C, Nelson E, Parrish J, Adler A, Blair R, Fromm S, Charney D, Leibenluft E, Ernst M, Pine D (2007) Abnormal attention modulation of fear circuit function in pediatric generalized anxiety disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 64(1):97–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mina Marmpena Angelica Lim TSD (2018) How does the robot feel? Perception of valence and arousal in emotional body language. Paladyn J Behav Robot 9(1):168–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mogg K, Bradley BP, Williams R (1995) Attentional bias in anxiety and depression: the role of awareness. Br J Clin Psychol 34(1):17–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pulido JC, González JC, Suárez-Mejías C, Bandera A, Bustos P, Fernández F (2017) Evaluating the child–robot interaction of the naotherapist platform in pediatric rehabilitation. Int J Soc Robot 9(3):343–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Phelps EA (2006) Emotion and cognition: insights from studies of the human amygdala. Annu Rev Psychol 57(1):27–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Posner J, Russell JA, Peterson BS (2005) The circumplex model of affect: an integrative approach to affective neuroscience, cognitive development, and psychopathology. Dev Psychopathol 17(03):715–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rossi S, Ercolano G, Raggioli L, Savino E, Ruocco M (2018) The disappearing robot: an analysis of disengagement and distraction during non-interactive tasks. In: 27th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 522–527

  29. Rossi S, Ferland F, Tapus A (2017) User profiling and behavioral adaptation for hri: a survey. Pattern Recogn Lett 99(Supplement C):3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rossi S, Ruocco M (2019) Better alone than in bad company: effects of incoherent non-verbal emotional cues for a humanoid robot. Interact Stud 20:487–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rossi S, Staffa M, Tamburro A (2018) Socially assistive robot for providing recommendations: comparing a humanoid robot with a mobile application. Int J Soc Robot 10(2):265–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Satake S, Kanda T, Glas DF, Imai M, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2009) How to approach humans?-Strategies for social robots to initiate interaction. In: 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction (HRI), pp 109–116

  33. Solomon B, DeCicco JM, Dennis TA (2012) Emotional picture processing in children: an erp study. Dev Cogn Neurosci 2(1):110–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Song S, Yamada S (2017) Expressing emotions through color, sound, and vibration with an appearance-constrained social robot. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, pp 2–11

  35. Trost MJ, Ford AR, Kysh L, Gold JI, Mataric M (2019) Socially assistive robots for helping pediatric distress and pain: a review of current evidence and recommendations for future research and practice. Clin J Pain 35(5):451–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Taddio A, Appleton M, Bortolussi R, Chambers C, Dubey V, Halperin S, Hanrahan A, Ipp M, Lockett D, MacDonald N, Midmer D, Mousmanis P, Palda V, Pielak K, Riddell RP, Rieder M, Scott J, Shah V (2010) Reducing the pain of childhood vaccination: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline. Can Med Assoc J 182(18):E843–E855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Thimmesch-Gill Z, Harder KA, Koutstaal W (2017) Perceiving emotions in robot body language: acute stress heightens sensitivity to negativity while attenuating sensitivity to arousal. Comput Hum Behav 76:59–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Thomas KM, Drevets WC, Whalen PJ, Eccard CH, Dahl RE, Ryan ND, Casey B (2001) Amygdala response to facial expressions in children and adults. Biol Psychiatry 49(4):309–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tielman M, Neerincx M, Meyer JJ, Looije R (2014) Adaptive emotional expression in robot–child interaction. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, HRI’14. ACM, New York, pp 407–414

  40. Wickens CD (2008) Multiple resources and mental workload. Hum Factors 50(3):449–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Williams JMG, Watts FN, MacLeod C, Mathews A (1988) Cognitive psychology and emotional disorders. The Wiley series in clinical psychology. Wiley, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy

    Silvia Rossi

  2. Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Perugia, Terni, Italy

    Marwa Larafa

  3. School of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Martina Ruocco

Authors
  1. Silvia Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marwa Larafa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martina Ruocco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silvia Rossi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

All participants’ parents signed a written informed consent.

Ethics statement

The study was approved by the Bioethics Committee of the University of Perugia (Italy).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rossi, S., Larafa, M. & Ruocco, M. Emotional and Behavioural Distraction by a Social Robot for Children Anxiety Reduction During Vaccination. Int J of Soc Robotics 12, 765–777 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00616-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00616-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation