Robotic Companions: Therapeutic Technology, Essay Example

Abstract

With the increase of life expectancy, an increase in need for caretakers is reasonably expected. The question is whether robotic companions are acceptable substitutes for human caretakers. Elderly persons with dementia need social interaction in order to retain mental and emotional function. Using pet robots allows each individual in assisted living to have ample time for interaction. Even so, there are reservations about whether robots can be trusted as caretakers and whether the decrease of human necessity is positive.

Elderly patients living in assisted living often suffer from dementia, loneliness, and depression. For this reason, Animal Assisted Therapy (AAT) has become a popular tool to combat loneliness and support responsiveness. For approximately 10,000 years, dogs have evolved with humans and have been a reliable source of companionship. Interaction with animals has been proven to lower blood pressure and increase brain activity, along with prompting relaxation and lowering aggression. However, many hospitals and care facilities do not permit animals for allergy and safety reasons (Filan and Jones 597). Scientists have begun experimenting with substituting traditional robotic care units with more approachable, soft animals caretakers and companions. Banks explains the positive effects of this change, saying that elderly persons often develop attachment to these pets. Banks states, “Attachment has been defined as an emotional bond that supports a sense of closeness, well-being, and security” (Banks 173). The emotional and psychological effects of these interactions are monumental. By encouraging social activity and mental stimulation, these pet robots assist in helping the elderly to maintain more brain activity and social functionality for longer.

A common concern with electronic pets, is that elderly persons, who have often had limited contact with technology, will have a hard time accepting and appreciating the animals. However, after integration, the elderly have been surprisingly adaptable in accepting the robots and the social activity they present, and have been seen to trust in the animals, which supports the overall ability to form connections and bonds (Heerink, Kruse, Evers, and Wielinga). Another is the possibility that these robotic companions will promote isolation instead of social activity, as elderly persons may be more likely to associate with their artificial companions as opposed to living ones. Many have also voiced a concern about the dignity of elderly people. Some may feel like this is a purposeful deception of elderly people. However, according to the numerous studies conducted in Japan, where the population is aging swiftly due to the low birth rate and high life expectancy of the population, these companions have resulted in astoundingly positive results. It has been predicted that around 34% of the Japanese population will be over 65 years of age by the year 2035. This raises obvious problems of having enough caretakers to support the growing number of citizens in need of assistance. This makes the idea of artificial caretakers more attractive. While these studies have shown overall positive results from these interaction, both for practical reasons, and for the positive emotional consequences for the elderly, some may question the validity of these findings due to the consecrated geography of the testing. However, America and Europe are facing similar problems, and could benefit similarly (Sharkey). Despite the reservations, the positive reactions from both caretakers and the elderly are encouraging.

Where robots are previously been contained to labs and scientific research, they have begun to be integrated into the everyday lives of citizens. Jacques Penders asserts that based on the rapid advancement of technology, it is all but inevitable that robotic caretakers are an obvious next step. This raises another problem, however; the issue of jobs. With more electronic caretakers to tend to the elderly, less human workers will be necessary. Along with this, the robots must be acceptable substitutes for humans. In order to determine acceptable robot forms, scientists have studied human perceptions of robotics, and what balance of human or animal characteristics with the obvious robotic attributes is preferable (Penders). These issues highlight the need to proceed cautiously in the robotic companions situation.

The design and programming for these robots is essential to their ability to assist elders. “PARO,” an electronic seal that has become popular with assisted living residents, has numerous of special functions built into his design that allow him to perform in a way that makes him a valuable caretaker. PARO has sensors for light, temperature, movement, posture, and noise, allowing him to gage the attitudes of those around him. This allows PARO to respond like a live animal to touch, embrace, and even hostility. His posture sensor allows him to know when he is being hugged, and he is then able to make comforting sounds and movements (“PARO Therapeutic Robot”). While some robots have more practical uses, such as carrying immobile patients, taking patients’ temperatures and pain statuses, PARO is exclusively for comfort.

The physical form of the robot is not the most essential aspect of the machine. “Pleo” is a mobile app that allows people to care for a virtual animal. The PSI theory, a theory that seeks to understand the psychological connection of humans to outside agents, of the app regulates the user’s level of attention towards the pet, which changes the pet’s level of “attachment” towards the user. This programming encourages users to strive for a deeper bond with the app (Dimas). One of the most important aspects of these machines is their ability to adapt. Joscha Bach defines adaptively as the process by which “the agent changes its responses in accord to what it perceives, it might take action to improve its environment and learn how to cope with it” (Bach). This aspect of adaptability is what makes modern day robots so technologically advanced and realistic. Technology’s aptitude to alter itself in intelligent response to a stimulant.

Without stimulation, the minds of patients with dementia are likely to decay. Robotic pets allow these persons the social interaction and bonding experiences they need to retain the ability to function psychologically. Human mistrust of robots accompanies the growing integration of technology into all aspects of human life, and restricts the use of pet robots as tools for the elderly; even so, the positive outcomes of interactions with robotic companions outweigh the reservations.

Resources

Bach, Joscha. Principles of Synthetic Intelligence: PSI: An Architecture of Motivated Cognition. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.

Banks, Marian R., Lisa M. Willoughby, and William A. Banks. “Animal-Assisted Therapy and Loneliness in Nursing Homes: Use of Robotic versus Living Dogs.” Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 9.3 (2008): 173-77.

Dimas, Joana. “Pervasive Pleo: Long-term Attachment with Artificial Pets.” (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

Filan, Susan L., and Robert H. Llewellyn-Jones. “Animal-assisted Therapy for Dementia: A Review of the Literature.” International Psychogeriatrics 18.04 (2006): 597-609.

Heerink, Marcel, Ben Kröse, Vanessa Evers, and Bob Wielinga. “Assessing Acceptance of Assistive Social Agent Technology By Older Adults: The Almere Model.” International Journal of Social Robotics 2.4 (2010): 361-75.

“PARO Therapeutic Robot.” PARO Robots Inc., 2014. Web. <http://www.parorobots.com/>.

Penders, Jacques. “Robotics Horizon.” Sheffield Hallam University Research (2014)

Sharkey, Amanda, and Noel Sharkey. “Granny and the Robots: Ethical Issues in Robot Care for the Elderly.” Ethics and Information Technology 14.1 (2012): 27-40.