1887
Volume 21, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1572-0373
  • E-ISSN: 1572-0381
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Social robots and their interactions with children are becoming increasingly sophisticated, with the emergence of child-robot relationships as a likely result. However, adequate measurement instruments that tap into concepts associated with child-robot relationship formation are scarce. We aimed to develop three measures that can be used to assess children’s closeness to, trust in, and perceived social support from, a social robot. We established the validity and reliability of these measures among 87 Dutch children aged 7 to 11 years old. Because of their shortness, the measures can efficiently be applied by scholars aiming to gain insight into the general process of child-robot relationship formation and its specific sub-processes, that is, the emergence of closeness, trust, and perceived social support.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/is.18052.str
2020-01-24
2020-04-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ahmad, M. I., Mubin, O., & Orlando, J.
    (2016) Effect of different adaptations by a robot on children’s long-term engagement: An exploratory study. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology, 31–37. doi:  10.1145/3001773.3001803
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3001773.3001803 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andrés, A., Pardo, D. E., Díaz, M., & Angulo, C.
    (2015) New instrumentation for human robot interaction assessment based on observational methods. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments, 7(4), 397–413. doi:  10.3233/AIS‑150331
    https://doi.org/10.3233/AIS-150331 [Google Scholar]
  3. Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T.
    (1987) The inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16(5), 427–454. doi:  10.1007/BF02202939
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02202939 [Google Scholar]
  4. Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D.
    (1992) Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 63(4), 596–612. doi:  10.1037/0022‑3514.63.4.596
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596 [Google Scholar]
  5. Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., Rabasca, A., & Pastorelli, C.
    (2003) A questionnaire for measuring the Big Five in late childhood. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 645–664. doi:  10.1016/S0191‑8869(02)00051‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00051-X [Google Scholar]
  6. Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S.
    (2009) Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1):71–81. doi:  10.1007/s12369‑008‑0001‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bauminger-Zviely, N., & Agam-Ben-Artzi, G.
    (2014) Young friendship in HFASD and typical development: Friend versus non-friend comparisons. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(7), 1733–1748. doi:  10.1007/s10803‑014‑2052‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2052-7 [Google Scholar]
  8. Baxter, P., Kennedy, J., Senft, E., Lemaignan, S., & Belpaeme, T.
    (2016) From characterising three years of HRI to methodology and reporting recommendations. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 391–398. doi:  10.1109/HRI.2016.7451777
    https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451777 [Google Scholar]
  9. Belpaeme, T., Baxter, P., De Greeff, J., Kennedy, J., Read, R., Looije, R., ... & Zelati, M. C.
    (2013) Child-robot interaction: Perspectives and challenges. Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Robotics, 452–459. doi:  10.1007/978‑3‑319‑02675‑6_45
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02675-6_45 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bernath, M. S., & Feshbach, N. D.
    (1995) Children’s trust: Theory, assessment, development, and research directions. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 4(1), 1–19. doi:  10.1016/S0962‑1849(05)80048‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-1849(05)80048-4 [Google Scholar]
  11. Berscheid, E., & Regan, P.
    (2005) The psychology of interpersonal relationships. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bethel, C. L., Henkel, Z., Stives, K., May, D. C., Eakin, D. K., Pilkinton, M., … Stubbs-Richardson, M.
    (2016) Using robots to interview children about bullying: Lessons learned from an exploratory study. Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 712–717. doi:  10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745197
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745197 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bethel, C. L., & Murphy, R. R.
    (2010) Review of human studies methods in HRI and recommendations. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2(4), 347–359. doi:  10.1007/s12369‑010‑0064‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0064-9 [Google Scholar]
  14. Betts, L. R., Rotenberg, K. J., & Trueman, M.
    (2009) The early childhood generalized trust belief scale. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24(2), 175–185. doi:  10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  15. Bigelow, B. J.
    (1977) Children’s friendship expectations: A cognitive-developmental study. Child Development, 28(1), 246–253. doi:  10.2307/1128905
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1128905 [Google Scholar]
  16. Borenstein, J., & Arkin, R. C.
    (2016) Robots, ethics, and intimacy: The need for scientific research. Proceedings of the Conference of the International Association for Computing and Philosophy. doi:  10.1007/978‑3‑030‑01800‑9_16
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01800-9_16 [Google Scholar]
  17. Borgers, N., De Leeuw, E., & Hox, J.
    (2000) Children as respondents in survey research: Cognitive development and response quality. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 66(1), 60–75. doi:  10.1177/075910630006600106
    https://doi.org/10.1177/075910630006600106 [Google Scholar]
  18. Broadbent, E.
    (2017) Interactions with robots: The truths we reveal about ourselves. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(9), 627–652. doi:  10.1146/annurev‑psych‑010416‑043958
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958 [Google Scholar]
  19. Byrne, D. E.
    (1971) The attraction paradigm. New York, NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Byrne, B. M.
    (2010) Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (2011) Structural equation modeling with Mplus. Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cappella, J. N.
    (1983) Conversational involvement: Approaching and avoiding others. InJ. M. Wiemann & R. P. Harrison (Eds.), Nonverbal interaction (pp.113–148). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Cole, M., Cole, S., & Lightfoot, C.
    (2005) The development of children (5th ed.). New York, NY: Worth.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. De Jong, C., Kühne, R., Peter, J., Van Straten, C. L., & Barco, A.
    (2018) Intentional acceptance of social robots: Development and validation of a self-report measure for children. Manuscript submitted for publication.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. De Jong, C., Peter, J., Kühne, R., & Barco, A.
    (in press). Children’s acceptance of social robots: A narrative review of the research 2000–2017. Interaction Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. De Jong, C., Van Straten, C. L., Peter, J., Kühne, R., & Barco, A.
    (2018) Children and social robots: Inventory of measures for CRI research. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impact, 44–45. doi:  10.1109/ARSO.2018.8625764
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ARSO.2018.8625764 [Google Scholar]
  27. Díaz, M., Nuño, N., Saez-Pons, J., Pardo, D. E., & Angulo, C.
    (2011) Building up child-robot relationship for therapeutic purposes: From initial attraction towards long-term social engagement. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition, 927–932. doi:  10.1109/FG.2011.5771375
    https://doi.org/10.1109/FG.2011.5771375 [Google Scholar]
  28. Dibble, J. L., Levine, T. R., & Park, H. S.
    (2012) The Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale (URCS): Reliability and validity evidence for a new measure of relationship closeness. Psychological Assessment, 24(3), 565–572. doi:  10.1037/a0026265
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026265 [Google Scholar]
  29. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U.
    (2008) Representative trust and reciprocity: Prevalence and determinants. Economic Inquiry, 46(1), 84–90. doi:  10.1111/j.1465‑7295.2007.00082.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2007.00082.x [Google Scholar]
  30. Eisinga, R., Te Grotenhuis, M., & Pelzer, B.
    (2013) The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown?International Journal of Public Health, 58(4), 637–642. doi:  10.1007/s00038‑012‑0416‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0416-3 [Google Scholar]
  31. Eyssel, F.
    (2017) An experimental psychological perspective on social robotics. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 87, 363–371. doi:  10.1016/j.robot.2016.08.029
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2016.08.029 [Google Scholar]
  32. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J.
    (1999) Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. doi:  10.1037//1082‑989X.4.3.272
    https://doi.org/10.1037//1082-989X.4.3.272 [Google Scholar]
  33. Furman, W., & Bierman, K. L.
    (1984) Children’s conceptions of friendship: A multimethod study of developmental changes. Developmental Psychology, 20(5), 925–931. doi:  10.1037//0012‑1649.20.5.925
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.20.5.925 [Google Scholar]
  34. Gambetta, D.
    (1988) Can we trust trust?InD. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (pp.213–237). Padstow, UK: T. J. Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Gifford-Smith, M. E., & Brownell, C. A.
    (2003) Childhood peer relationships: Social acceptance, friendships, and peer networks. Journal of School Psychology, 41(4), 235–284. doi:  10.1016/S0022‑4405(03)00048‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(03)00048-7 [Google Scholar]
  36. Goodboy, A. K., & Booth-Butterfield, M.
    (2009) Individual differences in romantic partners’ desire for less closeness. North American Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 209–218.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Gordon-Hollingsworth, A. T., Thompson, J. E., Geary, M. A., Schexnaildre, M. A., Lai, B. S., & Kelley, M. L.
    (2016) Social Support Questionnaire for Children: Development and initial validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 49(2), 122–144. doi:  10.1177/0748175615596780
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175615596780 [Google Scholar]
  38. Guerrero, L. K.
    (1997) Nonverbal involvement across interactions with same-sex friends, opposite-sex friends and romantic partners: Consistency or change?Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14(1), 31–58. doi:  10.1177/0265407597141002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407597141002 [Google Scholar]
  39. Guneysu, A., & Arnrich, B.
    (2017) Socially assistive child-robot interaction in physical exercise coaching. Proceedings of the 26th International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 670–675. doi:  10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172375
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172375 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hedl, J. J., & Papay, J. P.
    (1982) The factor structure of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children: Kindergarten through the fourth grades. Personality and Individual Differences, 3(4), 439–446. doi:  10.1016/0191‑8869(82)90008‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(82)90008-3 [Google Scholar]
  41. Hieida, C., Abe, K., Attamimi, M., Shimotomai, T., Nagai, T., & Omori, T.
    (2014) Physical embodied communication between robots and children: An approach for relationship building by holding hands. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 3291–3298. doi:  10.1109/IROS.2014.6943020
    https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2014.6943020 [Google Scholar]
  42. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M.
    (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. doi:  10.1080/10705519909540118
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 [Google Scholar]
  43. Janveau-Brennan, G., & Markovits, H.
    (1999) The development of reasoning with causal conditionals. Developmental Psychology, 35(4), 904–911. doi:  10.1037//0012‑1649.35.4.904
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.35.4.904 [Google Scholar]
  44. Kahn, P. H. & Gary, H. E., & Shen, S.
    (2013) Children’s social relationships with current and near-future robots. Child Developmental Perspectives, 7(1), 32–37. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12011\
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12011\ [Google Scholar]
  45. Kahn, P. H., & Turiel, E.
    (1988) Children’s conceptions of trust in the context of social expectations. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 34(4), 403–419.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B.
    (2015) The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507. doi:  10.1177/0049124114543236
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114543236 [Google Scholar]
  47. Kidd, A. H., & Kidd, R. M.
    (1987) Seeking a theory of the human/companion animal bond. Anthrozoös, 1(3), 140–145. doi:  10.2752/089279388787058489
    https://doi.org/10.2752/089279388787058489 [Google Scholar]
  48. Knapp, M. L.
    (1983) Dyadic relationship development. InJ. M. Wiemann & R. P. Harrison (Eds.), Nonverbal interaction (pp.179–207). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Kory Westlund, J. M., Park, H. W., Williams, R., & Breazeal, C.
    (2018) Measuring children’s long-term relationships with social robots. Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Interaction Design and Children. doi:  10.1145/3202185.3202732
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3202185.3202732 [Google Scholar]
  50. Kose-Bagci, H., Ferrari, E., Dautenhahn, K., Syrdal, D. S., & Nehaniv, C. L.
    (2009) Effects of embodiment and gestures on social interaction in drumming games with a humanoid robot. Advanced Robotics, 23(14), 1951–1996. doi:  10.1163/016918609X12518783330360
    https://doi.org/10.1163/016918609X12518783330360 [Google Scholar]
  51. Krämer, N. C., Rosenthal-Von der Pütten, A. M., & Hoffmann, L.
    (2015) Social effects of virtual and robot companions. InS. S. Sundar (Ed.), The handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp.137–159). Chicester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781118426456.ch6
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118426456.ch6 [Google Scholar]
  52. Kruijff-Korbayova, I., Oleari, E., Baroni, I., Kiefer, B., Zelati, M. C., Pozzi, C., & Sanna, A.
    (2014) Effects of off-activity talk in human-robot interaction with diabetic children. Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 649–654. doi:  10.1109/ROMAN.2014.6926326
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2014.6926326 [Google Scholar]
  53. La Greca, A. M., & Lopez, N.
    (1998) Social anxiety among adolescents: Linkages with peer relations and friendships. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 26(2), 83–94. doi:  10.1016/S0887‑6185(98)00008‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0887-6185(98)00008-5 [Google Scholar]
  54. La Greca, A. M., & Stone, W. L.
    (1993) Social anxiety scale for children-revised: Factor structure and concurrent validity. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 22(1), 17–27. doi: 10.1207/s15374424jccp2201
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp2201 [Google Scholar]
  55. Lakey, B., Thomson Ross, L., Butler, C., & Bentley, K.
    (1996) Making social support judgments: The role of similarity and conscientiousness. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15(3), 283–304. doi:  10.1521/jscp.1996.15.3.283
    https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1996.15.3.283 [Google Scholar]
  56. Larzelere, R. E., & Huston, T. L.
    (1980) The dyadic trust scale: Toward understanding interpersonal trust in close relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42(3), 595–604. doi:  10.2307/351903
    https://doi.org/10.2307/351903 [Google Scholar]
  57. Leite, I., Castellano, G., Pereira, A., Martinho, C., & Paiva, A.
    (2014) Empathic robots for long-term interaction: Evaluating social presence, engagement, and perceived support in children. International Journal of Social Robotics, 6(3), 329–341. doi:  10.1007/s12369‑014‑0227‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0227-1 [Google Scholar]
  58. Leite, I., Pereira, A., & Lehman, J. F.
    (2017) Persistent memory in repeated child-robot conversations. Proceedings of the Conference on Interaction Design and Children, 238–247. doi:  10.1145/3078072.3079728
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.3079728 [Google Scholar]
  59. Lin, N.
    (1986) Conceptualizing social support. InN. Lin, A. D. Walter, & M. Ensel (Eds.), Social support, life events, and depression (pp.17–30). Orlando, FL: Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑450660‑2.50008‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-450660-2.50008-2 [Google Scholar]
  60. Looije, R., Van der Zalm, A., Neerincx, M. A., & Beun, R. J.
    (2012) Help, I need some body: The effect of embodiment on playful learning. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 718–724. doi:  10.1109/ROMAN.2012.6343836
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2012.6343836 [Google Scholar]
  61. Marsh, H. W.
    (1986) Negative item bias in ratings scales for preadolescent children: A cognitive-developmental phenomenon. Developmental Psychology, 22(1), 37–49. doi:  10.1037//0012‑1649.22.1.37
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.22.1.37 [Google Scholar]
  62. McCroskey, L. L., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P.
    (2006) Analysis and improvement of the measurement of interpersonal attraction and homophily. Communication Quarterly, 54(1), 1–31. doi:  10.1080/01463370500270322
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370500270322 [Google Scholar]
  63. Mehrabian, A.
    (1972) Nonverbal communication. New Brunswick, NJ: AldineTransaction.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Moosbrugger, H., & Kelava, A.
    (Eds.) (2007) Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Muris, P., Meesters, C., & Diederen, R.
    (2005) Psychometric properties of the Big Five Questionnaire for Children (BFQ-C) in a Dutch sample of young adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1757–1769. doi:  10.1016/j.paid.2004.11.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.11.018 [Google Scholar]
  66. Muris, P., Meesters, C., Van Melick, M., & Zwambag, L.
    (2001) Self-reported attachment style, attachment quality, and symptoms of anxiety and depression in young adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(5), 809–818. doi:  10.1016/S0191‑8869(00)00074‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00074-X [Google Scholar]
  67. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O.
    (2012) Mplus User’s Guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Ognibene, T. C., & Collins, N. L.
    (1998) Adult attachment styles, perceived social support and coping strategies. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(3), 323–345. doi:  10.1177/0265407598153002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407598153002 [Google Scholar]
  69. Ólafsson, K., Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L.
    (2013) How to research children and online technologies? Frequently asked questions and best practice. London, UK: EU Kids Online, LSE.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Pearson, Y., & Borenstein, J.
    (2014) Creating “companions” for children: The ethics of designing esthetic features for robots. AI & Society, 29(1), 23–31. doi:  10.1007/s00146‑012‑0431‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-012-0431-1 [Google Scholar]
  71. Peter, J., Kühne, R., Barco, A., De Jong, C., & Van Straten, C. L.
    (2019) Asking today the crucial questions of tomorrow: Social robots and the Internet of Toys. InG. Mascheroni & D. Holloway (Eds.), The Internet of Toys: Practices, affordances and the political economy of children’s smart play (pp.25–46). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan (Springer Nature). 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑10898‑4_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10898-4_2 [Google Scholar]
  72. Popovic, M., Milne, D., & Barrett, P.
    (2003) The Scale of Perceived Interpersonal Closeness (PICS). Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory & Practice, 10(5), 286–301. doi:  10.1002/cpp.375
    https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.375 [Google Scholar]
  73. Prudon, P.
    (2015) Confirmatory factor analysis: A brief introduction and critique. Comprehensive Psychology, 4. doi:  10.2466/03.CP.4.10
    https://doi.org/10.2466/03.CP.4.10 [Google Scholar]
  74. Punch, S.
    (2002) Research with children. The same or different from research with adults?Childhood, 9(3), 321–341. doi:  10.1177/0907568202009003005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568202009003005 [Google Scholar]
  75. Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P.
    (2007) Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(1), 203–212. doi:  10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  76. Rapee, R. M.
    (1997) Perceived threat and perceived control as predictors of the degree of fear in physical and social situations. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 11(5), 455–461. doi:  10.1016/S0887‑6185(97)00022‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0887-6185(97)00022-4 [Google Scholar]
  77. Saint-Aimé, S., Grandgeorge, M., Le Pevedic, B., & Duhaut, D.
    (2011) Evaluation of Emi interaction with non-disabled children in nursery school using Wizard of Oz technique. Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, 1147–1152. doi:  10.1109/ROBIO.2011.6181442
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBIO.2011.6181442 [Google Scholar]
  78. Salter, T., Werry, I., & Michaud, F.
    (2008) Going into the wild in child-robot interaction studies: Issues in social robotic development. Intelligent Service Robotics1(2), 93–108. doi:  10.1007/s11370‑007‑0009‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-007-0009-9 [Google Scholar]
  79. Schadenberg, B. R., Neerincx, M. A., Cnossen, F., & Looije, R.
    (2017) Personalising game difficulty to keep children motivated to play with a social robot: A Bayesian approach. Cognitive Systems Research, 43, 222–231. doi:  10.1016/j.cogsys.2016.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2016.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  80. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H.
    (2003) Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Severson, R. L., & Lemm, K. M.
    (2016) Kids see human too: Adapting an individual differences measure of anthropomorphism for a child sample. Journal of Cognition and Development, 17(1), 122–141. doi:  10.1080/15248372.2014.989445
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2014.989445 [Google Scholar]
  82. Spielberger, C. D.
    (1973) State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC): Preliminary Manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Sternberg, R. J.
    (1987) Liking versus loving: A comparative evaluation of theories. Psychological Bulletin, 102(3), 331–343. doi:  10.1037/0033‑2909.102.3.331
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.102.3.331 [Google Scholar]
  84. (1997) Construct validation of a triangular love scale. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27(3), 313–335. doi:  10.1002/(SICI)1099‑0992(199705)27:3<313::AID‑EJSP824>3.3.CO;2‑W
    https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199705)27:3<313::AID-EJSP824>3.3.CO;2-W [Google Scholar]
  85. Swickert, R. J., Hittner, J. B., & Foster, A.
    (2010) Big Five traits interact to predict perceived social support. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(6), 736–741. doi:  10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.018 [Google Scholar]
  86. Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J.
    (2007) Preadolescents’ and adolescents’ online communication and their closeness to friends. Developmental Psychology, 43(2), 267–277. doi:  10.1037/0012‑1649.43.2.267
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.2.267 [Google Scholar]
  87. Van Straten, C. L., Peter, J., & Kühne, R.
    (2019) Child-robot relationship formation: A narrative review of empirical research. International Journal of Social Robotics. doi:  10.1007/s12369‑019‑00569‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00569-0 [Google Scholar]
  88. Van Straten, C. L., Peter, J., Kühne, R., De Jong, C., & Barco, A.
    (2018) Technological and interpersonal trust in child-robot interaction: An exploratory study. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction, 253–259. doi:  10.1145/3284432.3284440
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3284432.3284440 [Google Scholar]
  89. Vernberg, E. M., Abwender, D. A., Ewell, K. K., & Beery, S. H.
    (1992) Social anxiety and peer relationships in early adolescence: A prospective analysis. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21(2), 189–196. doi:  10.1207/s15374424jccp2102_11
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp2102_11 [Google Scholar]
  90. Vogt, P., De Haas, M., De Jong, C., Baxter, P. & Krahmer, E.
    (2017) Child-robot interactions for second language tutoring to preschool children. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11(73). doi:  10.3389/fnhum.2017.00073
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00073 [Google Scholar]
  91. Wu, P.-C., Foo, M.-D., & Turban, D. B.
    (2008) The role of personality in relationship closeness, developer assistance, and career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(3), 440–448. doi:  10.1016/j.jvb.2008.08.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.08.005 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/is.18052.str
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/is.18052.str
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month

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