IT’S MY BUDDY: EXPLORING THE PERCEPTIONS OF PEOPLE WITH DEMENTIA ABOUT THE SOCIAL ROBOT PARO IN A HOSPITAL SETTING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract New technology such as social robots opens up new opportunities in hospital settings. PARO, a robotic pet seal, was designed to provide emotional and social support for older people with dementia. This project aims to explore the perceptions of persons with dementia about PARO’s role in a hospital setting. Video-ethnographic methods were applied. We had conversational interviews with and video observations of 10 older people with dementia in the geriatric unit of a large Canadian hospital. Also, semi-structured interviews and two focus groups were conducted with 10 staff members in the local unit to gain contextual information. Thematic analysis yielded three substantive themes: (a) “it’s like a buddy”—the robot helps people with dementia uphold a sense of self in the world; (b) “it’s a conversation piece”—the baby seal facilitates social connection; and (c) “it’s all about love”—PARO transforms and humanizes the clinical setting. Our findings help provide a better understanding of the direct perspectives of patients with dementia on the use of social robots. Instead of substituting human contact, the social robot complements emotional care and supports our fundamental human need for love.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".