Game-Based Human-Robot Interaction Promotes Self-disclosure in People with Visual Impairments and Intellectual Disabilities

  • Jelle-Jan De Groot
  • Emilia BarakovaEmail author
  • Tino Lourens
  • Evelien van Wingerden
  • Paula Sterkenburg
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11486)


The willingness to share personal information about negative social experiences is of great importance for the effectiveness of robot-mediated social therapies. This paper reports the results of a pilot test on the effectiveness of using a game or a conversation on achieving a higher self-disclosure in people with visual and intellectual disabilities. The participants interacted with a humanoid robot NAO. Comparable game-based and conversation-based interaction were implemented. We measured the length of the self-disclosing sentences during the two interactions. The majority of the participants said that they preferred the conversation-based over the game-based interaction. The results indicate that during the game-based interaction the participants used much longer self-disclosing sentences in comparison with the to be conversation-based interaction. The outcomes of this pilot will help to improve the human-robot interactions for promoting self-disclosure as the first step in a research project that aims to alleviate worrying behavior in this user group.



We thank the six participants in this study for participating and contributing to this research. We also thank Bartiméus expertise center for facilitating the research and Bartiméus Sonneheerdt Foundation for the Grant nr 2017075B.


  1. 1.
    Sprecher, S., Hendrick, S.S.: Self-disclosure in intimate relationships: associations with individual and relationship characteristics over time. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 23(6), 857–877 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sprecher, S., Treger, S., Wondra, J.D., Hilaire, N., Wallpe, K.: Taking turns: reciprocal self-disclosure promotes liking in initial interactions. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 49(5), 860–866 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aroyo, A.M., Rea, F., Sandini, G., Sciutti, A.: Trust and social engineering in human robot interaction: will a robot make you disclose sensitive information, conform to its recommendations or gamble? IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 3(4), 3701–3708 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barakova, E.I., Bajracharya, P., Willemsen, M., Lourens, T., Huskens, B.: Long-term LEGO therapy with humanoid robot for children with ASD. Expert Syst. 32(6), 698–709 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., Evenson, S.: Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 493–502. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kumazaki, H., et al.: Can robotic systems promote self-disclosure in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder? A pilot study. Front. Psychiatry 9(2018), 36 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    World Health Organization, et al.: International classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps: a manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease, published in accordance with resolution wha29. 35 of the twenty-ninth world health assembly, May 1976 (1980)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ferreira, B., Silva, W., Oliveira Jr, E.A., Conte, T.: Designing personas with empathy map. In: SEKE, vol. 152 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McDonald, S.: Studying actions in context: a qualitative shadowing method for organizational research. Qual. Res. 5(4), 455–473 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kearsley, G., Shneiderman, B.: Engagement theory: a framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educ. Technol. 38(5), 20–23 (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cooper, G., Hoffman, K., Powell, B., Marvin, R.: The Circle of Security Intervention. Disorganized Attachment and Caregiving, p. 318 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lourens, T., Barakova, E.: User-friendly robot environment for creation of social scenarios. In: Ferrández, J.M., Álvarez Sánchez, J.R., de la Paz, F., Toledo, F.J. (eds.) IWINAC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6686, pp. 212–221. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim, M.-G., et al.: Designing robot-assisted pivotal response training in game activity for children with autism. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), pp. 1101–1106. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buchina, N., Kamel, S., Barakova, E.: Design and evaluation of an end-user friendly tool for robot programming. In: 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), pp. 185–191. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Barakova, E.I., Lourens, T.: Event based self-supervised temporal integration for multimodal sensor data. J. Integr. Neurosci. 4(02), 265–282 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Straten, C.L., Smeekens, I., Barakova, E., Glennon, J., Buitelaar, J., Chen, A.: Effects of robots’ intonation and bodily appearance on robot-mediated communicative treatment outcomes for children with autism spectrum disorder. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 22(2), 379–390 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marchi, E., Ringeval, F., Schuller, B., Neustein, A.: Voice-enabled assistive robots for handling autism spectrum conditions: an examination of the role of prosody. In: Neustein, A. (ed.) Speech and Automata in the Health Care, pp. 207–236. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jelle-Jan De Groot
    • 1
  • Emilia Barakova
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tino Lourens
    • 2
  • Evelien van Wingerden
    • 3
  • Paula Sterkenburg
    • 3
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.TiViPEHelmondThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Clinical Child and Family StudiesVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations