Comparing Effect of Active vs. Passive Robotic Interaction on Joint Attention of Children with ASD

  • Faisal Mehmood
  • Sara AliEmail author
  • Yasar Ayaz
  • Muhammad Jawad Khan
  • Umer Asgher
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1201)


Recent research shows that robotic therapies are effective for improving core autism impairments. This paper focuses on analyzing the effect of active versus passive robotic interaction on joint attention of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). In both types of interaction, robot records data related to joint attention (JA) of children, however, the action taken is different for both the interactions. In active interaction, robot’s interaction is coupled with JA whereas in passive interaction there is no coupling of JA. The experiment was conducted on 12 ASD children including 10 males and 2 females. Each child was introduced to 16 interactions per trial. Each trial comprised of 8 pairs of active and passive interactions each. The frequency of trials was once per week. Results show that children focus more in active robotic interactions with an average accuracy of 68% whereas for the passive interactions the average accuracy is 61%. The results show the significance of active interaction in robotic interventions for ASD children.


Human-robot interaction Active interaction Passive interaction Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Joint attention 



We would like to acknowledgement the RISE lab of SMME-NUST and Autism Resource Center (ARC) for their support and resources during the research.


  1. 1.
    Bölte, S., Bartl-Pokorny, K.D., Jonsson, U., Berggren, S., Zhang, D., Kostrzewa, E., Falck-Ytter, T., Einspieler, C., Pokorny, F.B., Jones, E.J.H., et al.: How can clinicians detect and treat autism early? methodological trends of technology use in research. Acta Paediatr. 105, 137–144 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dickstein-Fischer, L.A., Crone-Todd, D.E., Chapman, I.M., Fathima, A.T., Fischer, G.S.: Socially assistive robots: current status and future prospects for autism interventions. Innov. Entrep. Heal. 5, 15 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cabibihan, J.-J., Javed, H., Aldosari, M., Frazier, T., Elbashir, H.: Sensing technologies for autism spectrum disorder screening and intervention. Sensors 17, 46 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scassellati, B., Admoni, H., Mataric, M.J.: Robots for use in autism research. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 14, 275–294 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., Dubowski, J.: Does appearance matter in the interaction of children with autism with a humanoid robot? Interact. Stud. 7, 479–512 (2006). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gernsbacher, M.A., Stevenson, J.L., Khandakar, S., Goldsmith, H.H.: Why does joint attention look atypical in autism? Child. Dev. Perspect. 2, 38–45 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murza, K.A., Schwartz, J.B., Hahs-Vaughn, D.L., Nye, C.: Joint attention interventions for children with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Lang. Commun. Disord. 51, 236–251 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ali, S., Mehmood, F., Dancey, D., Ayaz, Y., Khan, M.J., Naseer, N., Amadeu, R.D.C., Sadia, H., Nawaz, R.: An adaptive multi-robot therapy for improving joint attention and imitation of ASD children. IEEE Access. 7, 81808–81825 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ali, S., Mehmood, F., Ayaz, Y., Asgher, U., Khan, M.J.: Effect of different visual stimuli on joint attention of ASD children using NAO robot. In: International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, pp. 490–499 (2019)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mehmood, F., Ayaz, Y., Ali, S., de Cassia Amadeu, R., Sadia, H.: Dominance in visual space of ASD children using multi-robot joint attention integrated distributed imitation system. IEEE Access (2019)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gangi, D.N., Ibañez, L.V., Messinger, D.S.: Joint attention initiation with and without positive affect: Risk group differences and associations with ASD symptoms. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 44, 1414–1424 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Swanson, M.R., Siller, M.: Patterns of gaze behavior during an eye-tracking measure of joint attention in typically developing children and children with autism spectrum disorder. Res. Autism Spectr. Disord. 7, 1087–1096 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dawson, G., Adams, A.: Imitation and social responsiveness in autistic children. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 12, 209–226 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Loveland, K.A., Landry, S.H.: Joint attention and language in autism and developmental language delay. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 16, 335–349 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rocha, M.L., Schreibman, L., Stahmer, A.C.: Effectiveness of training parents to teach joint attention in children with autism. J. Early Interv. 29, 154–172 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Whalen, C., Schreibman, L.: Joint attention training for children with autism using behavior modification procedures. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 44, 456–468 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  • Faisal Mehmood
    • 1
  • Sara Ali
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yasar Ayaz
    • 1
  • Muhammad Jawad Khan
    • 1
  • Umer Asgher
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering (SMME)National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST)IslamabadPakistan

Personalised recommendations