How Emotional Dances with Social Robots Influence Group HRI for Older Adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Group-based dance therapy can provide physical health, social and cognitive benefits for older adults, as well as promote mental health. In this article, we present a novel Human–Robot Interaction (HRI) study that explores how robot-facilitated group-based dance therapy sessions influence the affect, engagement, and enjoyment of a group of older adults interacting with a socially assistive robot. Furthermore, we investigate how robot embodiment size impacts group experiences during HRI. A human-size robot and a toy-size robot both facilitated group-based therapy sessions with older adults at a long-term care home over a 2-month period. Extensive results showed that robot dance therapy can effectively increase group valence and engagement through repeated interaction sessions, while maintaining high levels of group enjoyment. There were no statistically significant differences found in group affect, engagement, and enjoyment among these two different robot embodiment sizes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it