Among social skills that are core symptoms of autism spectrum disorder, turn-taking plays a fundamental role in regulating social interaction and communication. Our main focus in this study is to investigate the effectiveness of a robot-enhanced intervention on turn-taking abilities. We aim to identify to what degree social robots can improve turn-taking skills and whether this type of intervention provides similar or better gains than standard intervention. This study presents a series of 5 single-subject experiments with children with autism spectrum disorder aged between 3 and 5 years. Each child receives 20 intervention sessions (8 robot-enhanced sessions—robot-enhanced treatment (RET), 8 standard human sessions—standard human treatment, and 4 sessions with the intervention that was more efficient). Our findings show that most children reach similar levels of performance on turn-taking skills across standard human treatment and RET, meaning that children benefit to a similar extent from both interventions. However, in the RET condition, children seemed to see their robotic partner as being more interesting than their human partner, due to the fact that they looked more at the robotic partner compared with the human partner.
American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5®), Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
2.
AshwinC.WheelwrightS.Baron-CohenS. (2006) Attention bias to faces in Asperger Syndrome: A pictorial emotion Stroop study. Psychological Medicine36(6): 835–843.
3.
BarlowD. H.HayesS. C. (1979) Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis12(2): 199–210.
4.
Baron-CohenS. (1997) Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Baron-CohenS. (2009) Autism: The empathizing–systemizing (E-S) theory. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences1156(1): 68–80.
6.
Baron-Cohen, S., Lombardo, M., Tager-Flusberg, H., & Cohen, D. (Eds.). (2013). Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental social neuroscience. Oxford, England: OUP.
7.
Baxter, P., Wood, R., & Belpaeme, T. (2012). A touchscreen-based “Sandtray” to facilitate, mediate and contextualise human-robot social interaction. In 2012 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 105–106). Boston: IEEE-RAS Robotics and Automation.
8.
BegumM.SernaR. W.YancoH. A. (2016) Are robots ready to deliver autism interventions? A comprehensive review. International Journal of Social Robotics8: 157–181.
BonsD.van den BroekE.ScheepersF.HerpersP.RommelseN.BuitelaaarJ. K. (2013) Motor, emotional, and cognitive empathy in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder and conduct disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology41(3): 425–443.
11.
BrozF.NehanivC. L.Kose-BagciH.DautenhahnK. (2012) Interaction histories and short term memory: Enactive development of turn-taking behaviors in a childlike humanoid robot, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.5600.
12.
ChevallierC.KohlsG.TroianiV.BrodkinE. S.SchultzR. T. (2012) The social motivation theory of autism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences16(4): 231–239.
13.
Costescu, C., Vanderborght, B., Matu, S., Szentagotai, A., Dobrean, A., & David, D. (2016, September 16–18). Long-term robot-enhanced intervention: Social engagement, emotional and behavioral reactions of children with ASD in an imitation task. Paper presented at Autism-Europe International Congress, Edinburgh, Scotland.
14.
DavidD.AntonR.StefanS.MogoaseC.MatuS. (2010) Adaptation of the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Bucharest, Romania: O.S. Publishing.
15.
DavidD.MatuS. A.DavidO. A. (2014) Robot-based psychotherapy: Concepts development, state of the art, and new directions. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy7(2): 192–210.
16.
Dawson, G., Toth, K., Abbott, R., Osterling, J., Munson, J., Estes, A., & Liaw, J. (2004). Early social attention impairments in autism: Social orienting, joint attention, and attention to distress. Developmental Psychology, 40(2), 271.
17.
DiehlJ. J.SchmittL. M.VillanoM.CrowellC. R. (2012) The clinical use of robots for individuals with autism spectrum disorders: A critical review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders6(1): 249–262.
18.
DuquetteA.MichaudF.MercierH. (2008) Exploring the use of a mobile robot as an imitation agent with children with low-functioning autism. Autonomous Robots24(2): 147–157.
19.
EdingtonE. S. (2015) Nonparametric tests for single-case experiments. In: T. R. KratochwillI. R. Levin (ed.) Single-case research design and analysis (psychology revivals): New directions for psychology and education, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 133–157.
20.
Egger, H. L., Pine, D. S., Nelson, E., Leibenluft, E., Ernst, M., Towbin, K. E., & Angold, A. (2011). The NIMH Child Emotional Faces Picture Set (NIMH-ChEFS): A new set of children s facial emotion stimuli. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 20(3), 145–156.
21.
GoldsteinH.KaczmarekL. A.EnglishK. M. (2002) Promoting social communication: Children with developmental disabilities from birth to adolescence, Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Company.
22.
GothamK.PicklesA.LordC. (2009) Standardizing ADOS scores for a measure of severity in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders39(5): 693–705.
23.
Gouaillier, D., Hugel, V., Blazevic, P., Kilner, C., Monceaux, J., Lafourcade, P., … Maisonnier, B. (2009). Mechatronic design of NAO humanoid. In Robotics and automation, 2009. ICRA’09. IEEE International Conference CenterKobe, May 12-17, 2009, Japan (pp. 769–774). IEEE.
24.
HuskensB.VerschuurR.GillesenJ.DiddenR.BarakovaE. (2013) Promoting question-asking in school-aged children with autism spectrum disorders: Effectiveness of a robot intervention compared to a human-trainer intervention. Developmental Neurorehabilitation16(5): 345–356.
25.
IngersollB. (2008) The social role of imitation in autism: Implications for the treatment of imitation deficits. Infants & Young Children21(2): 107–119.
26.
JanoskyJ. E.LeiningerS. L.HoergerM. P.LibkumanT. M. (2009) Single subject designs in biomedicine, London, England: Springer Science & Business Media.
27.
JonesW.KlinA. (2013) Attention to eyes is present but in decline in 2-6-month-old infants later diagnosed with autism. Nature504(7480): 427–431.
28.
Kim, E. S., Berkovits, L. D., Bernier, E. P., Leyzberg, D., Shic, F., Paul, R., & Scassellati, B. (2013). Social robots as embedded reinforcers of social behavior in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(5), 1038–1049.
29.
KozimaH.MichalowskiM. P.NakagawaC. (2009) A playful robot for research, therapy, and entertainment. International Journal of Social Robotics1(1): 3–18.
30.
Lord, C., Rutter, M., Goode, S., Heemsbergen, J., Jordan, H., Mawhood, L., & Schopler, E. (1989). Autism diagnostic observation schedule: A standardized observation of communicative and social behavior. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 19(2), 185–212.
31.
LovaasO. I.FreitasL.NelsonK.WhalenC. (1967) The establishment of imitation and its use for the development of complex behavior in schizophrenic children. Behaviour Research and Therapy5(3): 171–181.
32.
HornerR. H.CarrE. G.HalleJ.McGeeG.OdomS.WoleryM. (2005) The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children71(2): 165–179.
33.
ManolovR.JamiesonM.EvansJ. J.SierraV. (2016) A discussion of alternatives for establishing empirical benchmarks for interpreting single-case effect sizes. Psicológica37(2): 209–234.
34.
ParkerR. I.VannestK. J.DavisJ. L. (2011) Effect size in single-case research: A review of nine nonoverlap techniques. Behavior Modification35(4): 303–322.
35.
ParkerR. I.VannestK. J.DavisJ. L.SauberS. B. (2011) Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy42(2): 284–299.
36.
PopC. A.PinteaS.VanderborghtB.DavidD. O. (2014) Enhancing play skills, engagement and social skills in a play task in ASD children by using robot-based interventions. A pilot study. Interaction Studies15(2): 292–320.
37.
PopC. A.SimutR. E.PinteaS.SaldienJ.RusuA. S.VanderfaeillieJ.VanderborghtB. (2013) Social robots vs. computer display: Does the way social stories are delivered make a difference for their effectiveness on ASD children?Journal of Educational Computing Research49(3): 381–401.
38.
QuirmbachL. M.LincolnA. J.Feinberg-GizzoM. J.IngersollB. R.AndrewsS. M. (2009) Social stories: Mechanisms of effectiveness in increasing game play skills in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder using a pretest posttest repeated measures randomized control group design. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders39(2): 299–321.
39.
Riley-TillmanT.BurnsM. (2009) Evaluating educational interventions: Single-case design for measuring response to intervention, New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
40.
RobinsB.DautenhahnK.Te BoekhorstR.BillardA. (2004) Effects of repeated exposure to a humanoid robot on children with autism. In: KeatesS. ClarksonJ.LangdonP.RobinsonP. (eds) Designing a more inclusive world, London, England: Springer, pp. 225–236.
41.
Robins, B., Dickerson, P., Stribling, P., & Dautenhahn, K. (2004). Robot-mediated joint attention in children with autism: A case study in robot-human interaction. Interaction studies, 5(2), 161–198.
42.
SalterT.MichaudF.LaroucheH. (2010) How wild is wild? A taxonomy to characterize the ‘wildness’ of child-robot interaction. International Journal of Social Robotics2(4): 405–415.
43.
ScassellatiB.AdmoniH.MatarićM. (2012) Robots for use in autism research. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering14: 275–294.
44.
SimutR. E.VanderfaeillieJ.PecaA.Van de PerreG.VanderborghtB. (2016) Children with autism spectrum disorders make a fruit salad with Probo, the social robot: An interaction study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders46(1): 113–126.
45.
Sloetjes, H., & Wittenburg, P. (2008). Annotation by category-ELAN and ISO DCR. In 6th international Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008), 28-30 May 2008, Morocco.
46.
SolomonB. G.HowardT. K.SteinB. L. (2015) Critical assumptions and distribution features pertaining to contemporary single-case effect sizes. Journal of Behavioral Education24(4): 438–458.
47.
Stanton-ChapmanT. L.SnellM. E. (2011) Promoting turn-taking skills in preschool children with disabilities: The effects of a peer-based social communication intervention. Early Childhood Research Quarterly26(3): 303–319.
48.
TapusA.PecaA.AlyA.PopC.JisaL.PinteaS.DavidD. O. (2012) Children with autism social engagement in interaction with Nao, an imitative robot – A series of single case experiments. Interaction Studies13(3): 315–347.
TarlowK. R. (2017) An improved rank correlation effect size statistic for single-case designs: Baseline corrected Tau. Behavior Modification41(4): 427–467.
51.
ThillS.PopC. A.BelpaemeT.ZiemkeT.VanderborghtB. (2012) Robot-assisted therapy for autism spectrum disorders with (partially) autonomous control: Challenges and outlook. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics3(4): 209–217.
52.
VanderborghtB.SimutR.SaldienJ.PopC.RusuA. S.PinteaS.DavidD. O. (2012) Using the social robot Probo as a social story telling agent for children with ASD. Interaction Studies13(3): 348–372.
53.
Wainer, J., Dautenhahn, K., Robins, B., & Amirabdollahian, F. (2010). Collaborating with Kaspar: Using an autonomous humanoid robot to foster cooperative dyadic play among children with autism. In Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), 2010 10th IEEE-RAS International Conference on (pp. 631–638). Nashville: IEEE RAS-IEEE-RAS Robotics and Automation.
54.
WainerJ.DautenhahnK.RobinsB.AmirabdollahianF. (2014) A pilot study with a novel setup for collaborative play of the humanoid robot KASPAR with children with autism. International Journal of Social Robotics6(1): 45–65.
55.
ZwickelJ.WhiteS. J.ConistonD.SenjuA.FrithU. (2010) Exploring the building blocks of social cognition: Spontaneous agency perception and visual perspective taking in autism. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience6: 564–571.
