Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
167 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Multiple Ways of Working with Users to Develop Physically Assistive Robots (2403.00489v2)

Published 1 Mar 2024 in cs.HC and cs.RO

Abstract: Despite the growth of physically assistive robotics (PAR) research over the last decade, nearly half of PAR user studies do not involve participants with the target disabilities. There are several reasons for this -- recruitment challenges, small sample sizes, and transportation logistics -- all influenced by systemic barriers that people with disabilities face. However, it is well-established that working with end-users results in technology that better addresses their needs and integrates with their lived circumstances. In this paper, we reflect on multiple approaches we have taken to working with people with motor impairments across the design, development, and evaluation of three PAR projects: (a) assistive feeding with a robot arm; (b) assistive teleoperation with a mobile manipulator; and (c) shared control with a robot arm. We discuss these approaches to working with users along three dimensions -- individual vs. community-level insight, logistic burden on end-users vs. researchers, and benefit to researchers vs. community -- and share recommendations for how other PAR researchers can incorporate users into their work.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (34)
  1. 2015. People with a disability less likely to have completed a bachelor’s degree. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (Jul 2015). https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2015/people-with-a-disability-less-likely-to-have-completed-a-bachelors-degree.htm
  2. 2022. Travel Patterns of American Adults with Disabilities. https://www.bts.gov/travel-patterns-with-disabilities
  3. Empowerment design work: Building participant structures that transform. In Keeping learning complex: The proceedings of the fifth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Mahwah, NJ, 132–138.
  4. Jeanette Bell and Tuck Wah Leong. 2019. Collaborative futures: Co-designing research methods for younger people living with dementia. In Proceedings of the 2019 chi conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–13.
  5. ” We have been magnified for years-Now you are under the microscope!”: Co-researchers with Learning Disabilities Created an Online Survey to Challenge Public Understanding of Learning Disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–17.
  6. Five enunciations of empowerment in participatory design. In Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference. 191–194.
  7. Stefano Federici. 2018. Assistive technology assessment handbook. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL.
  8. Successful assistive technology service delivery outcomes from applying a person-centered systematic assessment process: A case study. Life Span and Disability 18, 1 (1 Jul 2015), 41–74. http://www.lifespanjournal.it/client/abstract/ENG290_2.%20Federici.pdf
  9. Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual review of public health 19, 1 (1998), 173–202.
  10. The design of stretch: A compact, lightweight mobile manipulator for indoor human environments. In 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 3150–3157.
  11. Kinova inc. 2021. Jaco assistive robot - User guide. Published online: https://assistive.kinovarobotics.com/uploads/EN-UG-007-Jaco-user-guide-R05.pdf (last visited on March 1, 2024). EN-UG-007-r05-202111.
  12. Raja S Kushalnagar and Christian Vogler. 2020. Teleconference accessibility and guidelines for deaf and hard of hearing users. In Proceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1–6.
  13. A survey of robots in healthcare. Technologies 9, 1 (2021), 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies9010008
  14. Richard E Ladner. 2015. Design for user empowerment. interactions 22, 2 (2015), 24–29.
  15. Steps Toward Participatory Design of Social Robots. In HRI’17, HRI (Ed.). IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 244–253. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020237
  16. Disability studies as a source of critical inquiry for the field of assistive technology. In International ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility (ASSETS). ACM, 3–10.
  17. Sebastian Merkel and Alexander Kucharski. 2018. Participatory Design in Gerontechnology: A Systematic Literature Review. The Gerontologist 59, 1 (5 2018), e16–e25. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny034
  18. Design Principles for Robot-Assisted Feeding in Social Contexts. In ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (Stockholm, Sweden) (HRI ’23). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3568162.3576988
  19. Lessons Learned from Designing and Evaluating a Robot-Assisted Feeding System for Out-of-Lab Use. In Robotics: Science and Systems.
  20. Physically Assistive Robots: A Systematic Review of Mobile and Manipulator Robots That Physically Assist People with Disabilities. Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems 7 (2023).
  21. Active robot-assisted feeding with a general-purpose mobile manipulator: Design, evaluation, and lessons learned. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 124 (2 2020), 103344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2019.103344
  22. Recommendations for the Development of a Robotic Drinking and Eating Aid - An Ethnographic Study. In Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2021 (2021-09-01), Carmelo Ardito, Rosa Lanzilotti, Alessio Malizia, Helen Petrie, Antonio Piccinno, Giuseppe Desolda, and Kori Inkpen (Eds.). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85623-6_21
  23. AdaptiX – A Transitional XR Framework for Development and Evaluation of Shared Control Applications in Assistive Robotics. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 8, EICS (2024). Priprint on arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.15887.
  24. How to Communicate Robot Motion Intent: A Scoping Review. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), New York, NY, USA, Article 409, 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580857
  25. In Time and Space: Towards Usable Adaptive Control for Assistive Robotic Arms. In 2023 32nd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2300–2307. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309381
  26. Andrew Perrin and Sara Atske. 2021. Americans with disabilities less likely than those without to own some digital devices. Pew Research Center (Sep 2021). https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/09/10/americans-with-disabilities-less-likely-than-those-without-to-own-some-digital-devices/
  27. Robots for Humanity: In-Home Deployment of Stretch RE2. In Companion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction.
  28. Evaluating Customization of Remote Tele-operation Interfaces for Assistive Robots. (2023), 1633–1640. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309395
  29. Marcia Joslyn Scherer. 2005. Living in the state of stuck: How assistive technology impacts the lives of people with disabilities. Brookline Books.
  30. Jesper Simonsen. 2013. Routledge international handbook of participatory design. Routledge, New York.
  31. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs and the Adoption of Health-Related Technologies for Older Adults. Ageing International 37, 4 (12 2012), 470–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12126-011-9121-4
  32. An interdisciplinary approach to evaluating the need for assistive technology reduces equipment abandonment. Multiple Sclerosis Journal 12, 1 (2 2006), 88–93. https://doi.org/10.1191/1352458506ms1233oa
  33. Configuring Participation: On How We Involve People in Design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 429–438. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2470716
  34. Community-based participatory research: Assessing the evidence: Summary. AHRQ evidence report summaries (2004).

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets