Volume 21, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1572-0373
  • E-ISSN: 1572-0381
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Robots are versatile devices that are promising tools for supporting teaching and learning in the classroom or at home. In fact, robots can be engaging and motivating, especially for young children. This paper presents an experimental study with 81 kindergarten children on memorizations of two tales narrated by a humanoid robot. The variables of the study are the content of the tales (knowledge or emotional) and the different social behaviour of the narrators: static human, static robot, expressive human, and expressive robot. Results suggest a positive effect of the expressive behaviour in robot storytelling, whose effectiveness is comparable to a human with the same behaviour and better when compared with a static inexpressive human. Higher efficacy is achieved by the robot in the tale with knowledge content, while the limited capability to express emotions made the robot less effective in the tale with emotional content.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Alimisis, D.
    (2013) Educational robotics: Open questions and new challenges. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 6(1), 63–71.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Arlegui, J., Pina, A., & Moro, M.
    (2013) A PBL approach using virtual and real robots (with BYOB and LEGO NXT) to teaching learning key competences and standard curricula in primary level. InProceedings of the First International Conference on Technological Ecosystem for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp.323–328). ACM. 10.1145/2536536.2536585
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2536536.2536585 [Google Scholar]
  3. Atkinson, R. K., Mayer, R. E., & Merrill, M. M.
    (2005) Fostering social agency in multimedia learning: Examining the impact of an animated agent’s voice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 117–139. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bartneck, C., & Forlizzi, J.
    (2004) A design-centred framework for social human-robot interaction. InRobot and Human Interactive Communication, 2004. ROMAN 2004. 13th IEEE International Workshop on (pp.591–594). IEEE.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bhamjee, S., & Studies, U. of W. S. of H. and S.
    (2012) Children’s Perception and Interpretation of Robots and Robot Behaviour. University of Warwick.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bhamjee, S., Griffiths, F., & Palmer, J.
    (2010, June). Children’s perception and interpretation of robots and robot behaviour. InInternational Conference on Human-Robot Personal Relationship (pp.42–48). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bowlby, J.
    (2005) A secure base: Clinical applications of attachment theory (Vol.393). Taylor & Francis.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cabibihan, J.-J., So, W. C., Nazar, M., & Ge, S. S.
    (2009) Pointing gestures for a robot mediated communication interface. InInternational Conference on Intelligent Robotics and Applications (pp.67–77). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑10817‑4_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10817-4_7 [Google Scholar]
  9. Calbris, G.
    (1990) The semiotics of French gestures (Vol.1900). Indiana Univ Pr.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Chang, C.-W., Lee, J.-H., Wang, C.-Y., & Chen, G.-D.
    (2010) Improving the authentic learning experience by integrating robots into the mixed-reality environment. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1572–1578. 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.023
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.023 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, G.-D., & Wang, C.-Y.
    (2011) A survey on storytelling with robots. InInternational Conference on Technologies for E-Learning and Digital Entertainment (pp.450–456). Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chin, K.-Y., Hong, Z.-W., & Chen, Y.-L.
    (2014) Impact of using an educational robot-based learning system on students’ motivation in elementary education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7(4), 333–345. 10.1109/TLT.2014.2346756
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2014.2346756 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Coninx, A., Baxter, P., Oleari, E., Bellini, S., Bierman, B., Henkemans, O. B., … Espinoza, R. R.
    (2016) Towards long-term social child-robot interaction: using multi-activity switching to engage young users. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 5(1), 32–67. 10.5898/JHRI.5.1.Coninx
    https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.5.1.Coninx [Google Scholar]
  15. Conti, D., Di Nuovo, A., Cirasa, C., & Di Nuovo, S.
    (2017) A comparison of kindergarten storytelling by human and humanoid robot with different social behavior. InProceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp.97–98). ACM. doi:  10.1145/3029798.3038359
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038359 [Google Scholar]
  16. Conti, D., Di Nuovo, S., Buono, S., & Di Nuovo, A.
    (2017) Robots in education and care of children with developmental disabilities: a study on acceptance by experienced and future professionals. International Journal of Social Robotics, 9, 51–62. doi:  10.1007/s12369‑016‑0359‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0359-6 [Google Scholar]
  17. Conti, D., Di Nuovo, S., & Di Nuovo, A.
    (2019) Kindergarten Children Attitude Towards Humanoid Robots : what is the Effect of the First Experience ?InProceedings of the Companion of the 2019 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (p.2pages). ACM. 10.1109/HRI.2019.8673204
    https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2019.8673204 [Google Scholar]
  18. Conti, D., Trubia, G., Buono, S., Di Nuovo, S., & Di Nuovo, A.
    (2018) Evaluation of a robot-assisted therapy for children with autism and intellectual disability. InAnnual Conference Towards Autonomous Robotic Systems (pp.405–415). Springer. doi:  10.1007/978‑3‑319‑96728‑8_34
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96728-8_34 [Google Scholar]
  19. Dautenhahn, K., & Werry, I.
    (2004) Towards interactive robots in autism therapy: Background, motivation and challenges. Pragmatics & Cognition, 12(1), 1–35. 10.1075/pc.12.1.03dau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.12.1.03dau [Google Scholar]
  20. De Cristoforis, P., Pedre, S., Nitsche, M., Fischer, T., Pessacg, F., & Di Pietro, C.
    (2013) A behavior-based approach for educational robotics activities. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(1), 61–66. 10.1109/TE.2012.2220359
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2012.2220359 [Google Scholar]
  21. Druin, A.
    (1999) Cooperative inquiry: developing new technologies for children with children. InProceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp.592–599). ACM.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Feil-Seifer, D., & Matarić, M. J.
    (2011) Socially assistive robotics. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 18(1), 24–31. 10.1109/MRA.2010.940150
    https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2010.940150 [Google Scholar]
  23. Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K.
    (2003) A survey of socially interactive robots. InRobotics and Autonomous Systems (Vol.42, pp.143–166). doi:  10.1016/S0921‑8890(02)00372‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8890(02)00372-X [Google Scholar]
  24. Fridin, M.
    (2014) Storytelling by a kindergarten social assistive robot: A tool for constructive learning in preschool education. Computers & Education, 70, 53–64. doi:  10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.043
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.043 [Google Scholar]
  25. Gelin, R., D’Alessandro, C., Le, Q. A., Deroo, O., Doukhan, D., Martin, J.-C., … Rosset, S.
    (2010) Towards a Storytelling Humanoid Robot. InAAAI Fall Symposium: Dialog with Robots. Arlington.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. George, S., & Leroux, P.
    (2001) Project-based learning as a basis for a CSCL environment: An example in educational robotics. InFirst European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (Euro-CSCL 2001) (pp.269–276). Maastricht McLuhan Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Goodrich, M. A., & Schultz, A. C.
    (2007) Human-robot interaction: A survey. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction, 1(3), 203–275. doi:  10.1561/1100000005
    https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000005 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hall, E. T.
    (1974) Handbook for proxemic research. Society for the Anthropology of Visual Communication.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Ham, J., Cuijpers, R. H., & Cabibihan, J.-J.
    (2015) Combining Robotic Persuasive Strategies: The Persuasive Power of a Storytelling Robot that Uses Gazing and Gestures. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(4), 479–487. doi:  10.1007/s12369‑015‑0280‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0280-4 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hostetter, A. B.
    (2011) When do gestures communicate? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 297. 10.1037/a0022128
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022128 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hsu, S.-H., Chou, C.-Y., Chen, F.-C., & Chan, T.-W.
    (2007) An investigation of the differences between robot and virtual learning companions’ influences on students’ engagement. InDigital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning, 2007. DIGITEL’07. The First IEEE International Workshop on (pp.41–48). IEEE. 10.1109/DIGITEL.2007.10
    https://doi.org/10.1109/DIGITEL.2007.10 [Google Scholar]
  32. Ioannou, A., Andreou, E., & Christofi, M.
    (2015) Pre-schoolers’ interest and caring behaviour around a humanoid robot. TechTrends, 59(2), 23. 10.1007/s11528‑015‑0835‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0835-0 [Google Scholar]
  33. Jacq, A., Garcia, F., Dillenbourg, P., & Paiva, A.
    (2016) Building successful long child-robot interactions in a learning context. In2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp.239–246). IEEE. 10.1109/HRI.2016.7451758
    https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451758 [Google Scholar]
  34. Jou, M., Hung, C. K., & Lai, S.-H.
    (2010) Application of challenge based learning approaches in robotics education. International Journal of Technology and Engineering Education, 7(2), 17–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Jung, E. S., & Won, E.
    (2018) Systematic Review of Research Trends in Robotics Education for Young Children. Sustainability. doi:  10.3390/su10040905
    https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905 [Google Scholar]
  36. Kanda, T., Sato, R., Saiwaki, N., & Ishiguro, H.
    (2007) A two-month field trial in an elementary school for long-term human–robot interaction. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 23(5), 962–971. 10.1109/TRO.2007.904904
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2007.904904 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kennedy, J., Baxter, P., Senft, E., & Belpaeme, T.
    (2016) Social robot tutoring for child second language learning. In2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp.231–238). IEEE. 10.1109/HRI.2016.7451757
    https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451757 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kleinke, C. L.
    (1977) Compliance to requests made by gazing and touching experimenters in field settings. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 218–223. 10.1016/0022‑1031(77)90044‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90044-0 [Google Scholar]
  39. Laak, J. ter, De Goede, M., Aleva, A., & Rijswijk, P. Van
    (2005) The Draw-A-Person test: An indicator of children’s cognitive and socioemotional adaptation?The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 166(1), 77–93. 10.3200/GNTP.166.1.77‑93
    https://doi.org/10.3200/GNTP.166.1.77-93 [Google Scholar]
  40. Li, J.
    (2015) The benefit of being physically present: A survey of experimental works comparing copresent robots, telepresent robots and virtual agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 77, 23–37. doi:  10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  41. Li, L.-Y., Chang, C.-W., & Chen, G.-D.
    (2009) Researches on using robots in education. InInternational Conference on Technologies for E-Learning and Digital Entertainment (pp.479–482). Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Lopez-Caudana, E., Ponce, P., Cervera, L., Iza, S., & Mazon, N.
    (2017) Robotic platform for teaching maths in junior high school. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Louwerse, M. M., Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., & Mitchell, H. H.
    (2005) Social cues in animated conversational agents. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(6), 693–704. doi:  10.1002/acp.1117
    https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1117 [Google Scholar]
  44. Maricchiolo, F., Gnisci, A., Bonaiuto, M., & Ficca, G.
    (2009) Effects of different types of hand gestures in persuasive speech on receivers’ evaluations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(2), 239–266. 10.1080/01690960802159929
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802159929 [Google Scholar]
  45. Mayer, R. E., Sobko, K., & Mautone, P. D.
    (2003) Social cues in multimedia learning: Role of speaker’s voice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 419. 10.1037/0022‑0663.95.2.419
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.419 [Google Scholar]
  46. Movellan, J. R., Eckhardt, M., Virnes, M., & Rodriguez, A.
    (2009) Sociable robot improves toddler vocabulary skills. InHuman-Robot Interaction (HRI), 2009 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on (pp.307–308). IEEE.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S., Mahmud, A. Al, & Dong, J.-J.
    (2013) a Review of the Applicability of Robots in Education. Technology for Education and Learning, 1(1). 10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209‑0015
    https://doi.org/10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209-0015 [Google Scholar]
  48. Mutlu, B., Forlizzi, J., & Hodgins, J.
    (2006) A storytelling robot: Modeling and evaluation of human-like gaze behavior. InHumanoid robots, 2006 6th IEEE-RAS international conference on (pp.518–523). IEEE. 10.1109/ICHR.2006.321322
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ICHR.2006.321322 [Google Scholar]
  49. Pelachaud, C., Gelin, R., Martin, J.-C., & Le, Q. A.
    (2010) Expressive gestures displayed by a humanoid robot during a storytelling application. New Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction (AISB), Leicester, GB.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Petric, F., Miklic, D., & Kovacic, Z.
    (2017) Robot-assisted Autism Spectrum Disorder Diagnostics using POMDPs. Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction – HRI ’17, (March), 369–370. doi:  10.1145/3029798.3034819
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3034819 [Google Scholar]
  51. Piaget, J.
    (1951) The child’s conception of the world. Rowman & Littlefield.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Ponitz, C. C., McClelland, M. M., Matthews, J. S., & Morrison, F. J.
    (2009) A structured observation of behavioral self-regulation and its contribution to kindergarten outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 605. 10.1037/a0015365
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015365 [Google Scholar]
  53. Pot, E., Monceaux, J., Gelin, R., & Maisonnier, B.
    (2009) Choregraphe: A graphical tool for humanoid robot programming. InProceedings – IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp.46–51). doi:  10.1109/ROMAN.2009.5326209
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2009.5326209 [Google Scholar]
  54. Propp, V.
    (2010) Morphology of the Folktale (Vol.9). University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Rees, A., García-Peñalvo, F. J., Jormanainen, I., Tuul, M., & Reimann, D.
    (2016) An overview of the most relevant literature on coding and computational thinking with emphasis on the relevant issues for teachers.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Rennie, L. J., & Jarvis, T.
    (1995) Children’s choice of drawings to communicate their ideas about technology. Research in Science Education, 25(3), 239–252. doi:  10.1007/BF02357399
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357399 [Google Scholar]
  57. Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., & Dubowski, J.
    (2006) Does appearance matter in the interaction of children with autism with a humanoid robot?Interaction Studies, 7(3), 509–542. 10.1075/is.7.3.16rob
    https://doi.org/10.1075/is.7.3.16rob [Google Scholar]
  58. Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., Ferrari, E., Kronreif, G., Prazak-Aram, B., Marti, P., … Laudanna, E.
    (2012) Scenarios of robot-assisted play for children with cognitive and physical disabilities. Interaction Studies, 13(2), 189–234. doi:  10.1075/is.13.2.03rob
    https://doi.org/10.1075/is.13.2.03rob [Google Scholar]
  59. Scassellati, B.
    (2007) How social robots will help us to diagnose, treat, and understand autism. InRobotics research (pp.552–563). doi:  10.1007/978‑3‑540‑48113‑3_47
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48113-3_47 [Google Scholar]
  60. Scassellati, B., Admoni, H., & Matarić, M.
    (2012) Robots for use in autism research. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, 14, 275–94. doi:  10.1146/annurev‑bioeng‑071811‑150036
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071811-150036 [Google Scholar]
  61. Serholt, S., Barendregt, W., Vasalou, A., Alves-Oliveira, P., Jones, A., Petisca, S., & Paiva, A.
    (2016) The case of classroom robots: teachers’ deliberations on the ethical tensions. AI & SOCIETY, 1–19. doi:  10.1007/s00146‑016‑0667‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-016-0667-2 [Google Scholar]
  62. Sklar, E., Parsons, S., & Stone, P.
    (2004) Using RoboCup in university-level computer science education. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC), 4(2), 4. 10.1145/1071620.1071624
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1071620.1071624 [Google Scholar]
  63. Sugimoto, M.
    (2011) A mobile mixed-reality environment for children’s storytelling using a handheld projector and a robot. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(3), 249–260. 10.1109/TLT.2011.13
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2011.13 [Google Scholar]
  64. Tanaka, F., Cicourel, A., & Movellan, J. R.
    (2007) Socialization between toddlers and robots at an early childhood education center. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(46), 17954–17958. 10.1073/pnas.0707769104
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707769104 [Google Scholar]
  65. Tanaka, F., & Matsuzoe, S.
    (2012) Children teach a care-receiving robot to promote their learning: Field experiments in a classroom for vocabulary learning. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 1(1).
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Toh, L. P. E., Causo, A., Tzuo, P.-W., Chen, I., & Yeo, S. H.
    (2016) A review on the use of robots in education and young children. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 148.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Valenzeno, L., Alibali, M. W., & Klatzky, R.
    (2003) Teachers’ gestures facilitate students’ learning: A lesson in symmetry. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(2), 187–204. 10.1016/S0361‑476X(02)00007‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00007-3 [Google Scholar]
  68. Vertegaal, R., Slagter, R., Van der Veer, G., & Nijholt, A.
    (2001) Eye gaze patterns in conversations: there is more to conversational agents than meets the eyes. InProceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp.301–308). ACM. 10.1145/365024.365119
    https://doi.org/10.1145/365024.365119 [Google Scholar]
  69. Wijayasinghe, I. B., Ranatunga, I., Balakrishnan, N., Bugnariu, N., & Popa, D. O.
    (2016) Human-Robot Gesture Analysis for Objective Assessment of Autism Spectrum Disorder. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(5), 695–707. doi:  10.1007/s12369‑016‑0379‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0379-2 [Google Scholar]
  70. Williams, R.
    (2003) Television: Technology and cultural form. Psychology Press. 10.4324/9780203450277
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203450277 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error