A Scoping Review of the Use of Robotics Technologies for Supporting Social-Emotional Learning in Children with Autism
Saved in:
| Title: | A Scoping Review of the Use of Robotics Technologies for Supporting Social-Emotional Learning in Children with Autism |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Sarika Kewalramani (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2024 54(12):4481-4495. |
| Availability: | Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 15 |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Information Analyses |
| Descriptors: | Robotics, Social Emotional Learning, Autism Spectrum Disorders, Children, Cognitive Processes, Skill Development, Technology Uses in Education |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10803-023-06193-2 |
| ISSN: | 0162-3257 1573-3432 |
| Abstract: | This scoping review synthesises the current research into robotics technologies for promoting social-emotional learning in children with autism spectrum disorder. It examines the types of robotics technologies employed, their applications, and the gaps in the existing literature. Our scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. The systematic search of relevant databases allowed us to identify studies that use robotics technologies for fostering social, emotional, and cognitive skills in young children with autism. Our review has revealed that various robots, such as Nao, Kaspar, and Zeno, have been used to support the development of social and emotional skills through imitation games, turn-taking, joint attention, emotional recognition, and conversation. As most of these studies were conducted in clinical settings, there is a need for further research in classroom and community-based environments. Additionally, the literature calls for more high-quality longitudinal studies to assess the long-term effectiveness and sustainability of robot-assisted therapy and to assess adaptive and personalised interventions tailored to individual needs. More emphasis is recommended on professional development for educators, parents, and health professionals to incorporate robotics technologies as evidence-based interventions as a pathway for creating inclusive learning environments for children with autism. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2024 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1447825 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEMqTWplpSC0RqjZl_MBv0jAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDLAWN8pjF59mBHP90gIBEICBmmRAz34rwzuLH-0qQj_tDeNp3MOxoOxey2XB-SGHFAaZm-E0AgZDIor_On6L-c5ZWGVvw3Fomd52XKuSEjPWTsHMdn9YnMZys5Z3CEAc_t00J2ZTwCDcfRC-ZakUrcNsG2o4slpJa05K4RicWByW_1tnvgGGPoZ5KcwuylKcziX2uu3Ylyrzyt3_bQIm2zhi3Xr_tPqxQjalR6g= Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0180804687;aut01dec.24;2024Nov13.05:17;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0180804687-1">A Scoping Review of the Use of Robotics Technologies for Supporting Social-Emotional Learning in Children with Autism </title> <p>This scoping review synthesises the current research into robotics technologies for promoting social-emotional learning in children with autism spectrum disorder. It examines the types of robotics technologies employed, their applications, and the gaps in the existing literature. Our scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. The systematic search of relevant databases allowed us to identify studies that use robotics technologies for fostering social, emotional, and cognitive skills in young children with autism. Our review has revealed that various robots, such as Nao, Kaspar, and Zeno, have been used to support the development of social and emotional skills through imitation games, turn-taking, joint attention, emotional recognition, and conversation. As most of these studies were conducted in clinical settings, there is a need for further research in classroom and community-based environments. Additionally, the literature calls for more high-quality longitudinal studies to assess the long-term effectiveness and sustainability of robot-assisted therapy and to assess adaptive and personalised interventions tailored to individual needs. More emphasis is recommended on professional development for educators, parents, and health professionals to incorporate robotics technologies as evidence-based interventions as a pathway for creating inclusive learning environments for children with autism.</p> <p>Keywords: Autism spectrum disorder; Robotics technologies; Robot-assisted therapy; Child-robot interactions; Inclusive teaching and learning</p> <p>Copyright comment Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Autism, also known as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), is a neurodevelopmental condition that affects social interaction, social communication, and behaviour. Characterised by a wide range of symptoms and challenges, ASD can vary greatly from person to person. Individuals with autism may have difficulties with social interactions, repetitive behaviours, and sensory sensitivities, and they may exhibit restricted interests or intense focus on specific topics (Lord et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref1">29</reflink>]). Early intervention refers to the support and treatment provided to children with autism at a young age, typically during their preschool years or even earlier. Recently, there has been interest in the evaluation of early-intervention programs that integrate technology to address challenges associated with social-emotional learning in young children with autism, including video games (e.g., Baldassarri et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref2">3</reflink>]), tablets (e.g., Kahveci et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref3">21</reflink>]; Parsons et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref4">36</reflink>]), wearable technology (Black et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref5">7</reflink>]), and virtual or augmented reality (Dechsling et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref6">11</reflink>]). One type of emerging technology that might be used to support the development of social and emotional skills in children with autism is robots (Bharatharaj et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref7">6</reflink>]; Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref8">24</reflink>]; Marino et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref9">30</reflink>]). While there is some support for using robots with children with autism for social-emotional learning, a systematic review and appraisal of the evidence base has not yet been undertaken (Whitehouse et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref10">50</reflink>] in Autism Co-operative Research Centre [CRC] report). Understanding the exact type of evidence that informs practice for Robot-Assisted Therapy (RAT) with autistic children may provide useful knowledge to users and assist with the advancement of research in the field. In this study, we employed a scoping review methodology to review this body of literature. Specifically, this scoping review explores how robotics technologies might be applied to support social-emotional learning for children with autism.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-3">Autism and Social-Emotional Learning</hd> <p>Many children with autism have difficulty developing social and emotional skills. These include <emph>communication skills</emph>, such as self-expression and self-advocacy, listening to others, understanding nonverbal cues, and adapting communication styles to different contexts and individuals; <emph>relationship skills</emph>, such as communication, conflict resolution, cooperation, empathy, and the ability to establish and maintain boundaries; and <emph>self-management skills</emph>, such as emotional regulation, impulse control, stress management, goal setting, and perseverance (Cavioni et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref11">8</reflink>]). The development of social and emotional skills is important for all young children as these skills play a fundamental role in their overall development and well-being. They help children navigate social interactions, establish relationships, and regulate their emotions. These benefits extend into adolescence and adulthood and contribute to academic achievement, social relationships, and emotional well-being (Greenberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref12">18</reflink>]). Thus, such skills should be addressed as part of early-intervention programs for children with autism.</p> <p>Social-emotional learning (SEL) refers to the process of developing and applying the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that help individuals communicate, listen, understand, and manage emotions, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make decisions (Durlak et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref13">13</reflink>]). It involves acquiring and practising skills related to self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making. SEL is an integral aspect of early intervention and education and has gained recognition for its beneficial impact on children's academic and social outcomes (Mondi et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref14">34</reflink>]).</p> <p>Young children with autism may face specific challenges in various aspects of SEL. For example, some children with autism might experience difficulties in understanding and interpreting social cues such as facial expressions, body language, and social norms, while other children may face challenges in recognising, understanding, and managing their emotions (Mazefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref15">32</reflink>]). For example, they may exhibit intense emotional reactions, have difficulty identifying emotions in themselves and others, and have few coping strategies. Finally, some children with autism may have difficulty in verbal and nonverbal communication. They may struggle with using appropriate language, gestures, or facial expressions to convey their emotions. Given the many SEL challenges experienced by young children with autism and the positive impact of SEL, there is a need to identify evidence-based interventions for supporting the social-emotional development of young children with autism.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-4">Robot-Assisted Therapy and Social-Emotional Learning</hd> <p>Robot-assisted therapy (RAT) is a relatively new term. It describes an approach that leverages advances in human–robot interaction (HRI) and the use of robotics technology to help children with autism develop socialisation, communication, and play skills (Bharatharaj et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref16">6</reflink>]). Technologies that combine RAT with HRI might support the development of social and emotional skills in several ways. Firstly, robots might be programmed to engage in structured, predictable interactions that provide consistent learning opportunities. The consistent and predictable nature of robots might help reduce a child's anxiety and build confidence in social interactions (Saleh et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref17">40</reflink>]; van den Berk-Smeekens et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref18">48</reflink>]). Secondly, robots can serve as communication partners for children with autism, giving them opportunities to practise language and communication skills (Hoorn, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref19">19</reflink>]; Syriopoulou-Delli &amp; Gkiolnta, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref20">47</reflink>]). Robots might be uniquely able to incorporate visual supports, symbols, or even speech-generating devices to facilitate communication and encourage expressive and receptive language development for children with autism. Thirdly, robots may have interactive and engaging features that can capture the attention and motivation of children with autism, which might help sustain the child's engagement and make learning experiences more enjoyable and reinforcing (Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref21">24</reflink>]; Shamsuddin et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref22">42</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref23">43</reflink>]). Finally, robot-assisted technologies might be able to be programmed to adapt to the individual needs and preferences of children with autism, such as personalised intervention components, feedback, and prompts based on the child's specific abilities and goals (Huijnen et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref24">20</reflink>]; Pennisi et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref25">37</reflink>]).</p> <p>Some researchers have evaluated the use of RAT to teach social and emotional skills to children with autism. For example, De Korte et al. ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref26">10</reflink>]), who evaluated the use of RAT for improving the social-communicative skills of 3–8-year-old children, found growth in children's functional self-initiations after twenty 45-minute intervention sessions in a clinical setting. However, a limitation of this study was that the skills learned through RAT may not be generalisable to real-life settings or interactions with humans. In other examples, Yun et al. ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref27">51</reflink>]) and Marino et al. ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref28">31</reflink>]) evaluated the use of RAT for teaching emotional recognition to 4–7-year-old children and found significant improvements in contextualised emotion recognition, comprehension, and emotional perspective-taking. However, a limitation of these studies was that they were conducted in a clinical setting with no evaluation or translation of learnt skills into real-world settings. Despite advancements in RAT for children with autism, there remains a significant gap in understanding its translation and applicability in everyday settings. This is crucial, as the goal of any therapeutic intervention is to equip individuals with skills that are generalisable outside of clinical environments. The present study aims to bridge this knowledge gap by exploring the application of robotics technology in promoting SEL for children with autism.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-5">The Current Study</hd> <p>As the use of RAT to support SEL in children with autism is an emerging area of research, and to date a comprehensive review of the literature in this area has not been undertaken, this scoping review explores how robotics technology is applied to promote SEL for children with autism. In doing so, we aim to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the potential benefits and limitations of RAT. This study synthesises the existing literature to identify gaps in the current evidence base and highlights areas where further research is needed to establish the effectiveness and generalisability of applications of robotics technologies for children with autism. In doing so, we aim to inform further research and practice, ultimately contributing to the development of effective, evidence-based interventions for children with autism and their families. This scoping review sought to answer the following research questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> How has robotics technologies been used to promote social-emotional learning for children with autism?</item> <p></p> <item> What types of robotics technologies have been used in these studies?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0180804687-6">Method</hd> <p>We selected a scoping review to allow for the identification and analysis of the available literature on RAT and SEL. A scoping review, rather than a systematic review, was selected due to the exploratory nature of this research. This methodology allowed us to include a range of research studies, methods, and outcomes (Munn et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref29">35</reflink>]). As suggested by Munn et al. ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref30">35</reflink>]), scoping reviews allow for an in-depth exploration of relatively emerging literature on a particular subject. This allows researchers to provide an in-depth summary of their thematic focus, rather than a quantitative analysis of their findings. Our scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Reporting Guidelines, as illustrated in Fig. 1. We conducted a comprehensive search of PsycINFO, ERIC, and Scopus databases to identify relevant studies. Boolean operators (OR and AND) were employed to combine search terms, as detailed in Table 1. Each database's conventions were followed when entering the search terms.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 PRISMA flow diagram for literature search and selection process</p> <p>Table 1 Search terms for the scoping review</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Search&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Search Term&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Search 1&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Autis* OR ASD&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Search 2&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Robot* OR technolog*&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Search 3&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Socia* OR emotion*&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Search 4&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Search 1 AND Search 2 AND Search 3&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p>In this review, we define a robot as a technological artefact capable of performing tasks like face/voice recognition, talk-back, or tasks coded by users. These robots, with their physical designs often resembling a child and intentionally crafted to be cute and easily anthropomorphised, are particularly appealing to children (Anzalone et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref31">2</reflink>]; Kewalramani et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref32">22</reflink>]). For the scope of this review, SEL refers to the process through which children develop and apply skills such as listening, turn-taking, joint attention, emotion management, positive relationship establishment and maintenance, and social communication with peers and adults (Yun et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref33">51</reflink>]; Zorcec et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref34">52</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-7">Inclusion Criteria</hd> <p>Studies were considered eligible if they investigated the use of robots to enhance SEL outcomes among children with autism in clinical settings (e.g., therapy centres) or in classroom or home environments. We included studies conducted with children aged 0 to 8 years who were diagnosed with autism according to the DSM-5 or ICD-10. We also considered studies within our target age range that included children older than 8 years but excluded the datasets for older children. This review encompassed a wide range of peer-reviewed evidence, including journal articles and dissertations employing various study designs such as RCTs, quasi-experimental designs, single-case research designs, comparative studies, and case studies.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-8">Exclusion Criteria</hd> <p>Non-peer-reviewed publications (e.g., book chapters), publications in languages other than English, studies focused solely on robot functionality testing, editorials, and randomised controlled trial protocols were excluded. Studies published before 2000 were also excluded, as robots developed before that year could be obsolete and thus irrelevant to current applications.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-9">Search Procedure</hd> <p>Figure 1 presents the systematic search results, encompassing title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and the final number of studies included in this review. After removing duplicates, we imported the search results into Rayyan for title and abstract screening. The abstract screening resolved any discrepancies between the abstracts to determine the total number of studies for full-text screening. A total of 43 records advanced to the full-text screening phase, with 19 deemed eligible and 25 excluded for reasons such as protocol paper (<emph>n</emph> = 2), wrong study population (<emph>n</emph> = 2), wrong topic (<emph>n</emph> = 7), testing of robots (<emph>n</emph> = 10), describing robots (<emph>n</emph> = 3), and irrelevant type of article (<emph>n</emph> = 1). To minimise bias, we independently screened each record against the inclusion and exclusion criteria to assess eligibility. Disagreements between the research team were resolved in consensus meetings. Additionally, we screened the reference lists of the included studies to ensure a comprehensive search strategy.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-10">Data Extraction</hd> <p>For all included studies, data were extracted on authors, publication year, study location, study aims, study design, participant numbers, participant characteristics (age and sex), robot type, theoretical framework, research setting and duration, measurement tools, and research findings summaries.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-11">Data Analysis</hd> <p>We read and re-read the 19 included studies in full whilst keeping the current scoping review's research question in mind: How has robotics technologies been used to promote social-emotional learning for children with autism? A custom coding sheet was developed to permit the extraction of data on the following characteristics for each included study: location, aims, design, number of participants, participant characteristics (age and sex), robot type, theoretical framework, research setting and duration, dependent variable(s) measured in each study, measurement tools, research findings, and children's learning outcomes summaries. The first author then created themes using the constant-comparison method of coding (Saldana, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref35">39</reflink>]). This coding method involved reading the created table and comparing/contrasting how robotics technologies were being employed in the studies to promote social-emotional learning for children with autism. The fitting in and out of possible learning outcomes for children (e.g., social-emotional skills such as turn-taking, emotional understanding, and social communication) and the characteristics of the RAT being considered (e.g., humanoid, socially animated, non-humanoid, anthropomorphised) were axial coded to create categories from the data; then the categories were connected in a selective coding process to develop themes/concepts (Strauss, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref36">46</reflink>]). Figure 2 presents the learning outcomes with RAT, including social, emotional, cognitive, and related skills.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 2 Code, categories, and themes generated in this study. Adapted from Saldana's ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref37">39</reflink>]) code to theory approach</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-12">Results</hd> <p>Table 2 summarises the characteristics of the included studies. Our review identified and included 19 studies representing 16 distinct intervention types. Eight studies were randomised control trials, eight were case studies, and two utilised pre-test and post-test measures. Table 3 summarises the types of robots used and their features in the selected studies.</p> <p>Table 2 Summary of included studies</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Author (Year)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Country&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Participants&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Settings and duration&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tools of measurement/methods of assessment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Summary of findings&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" colspan="7"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;bold&gt;Randomised Controlled Trials&lt;/bold&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bharatharaj et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr6"&gt;2017&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;India&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;24 children&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(6&amp;#8211;16 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;KiliRO, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Special school classroom, 60 min for 49 days&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Manual observation by five volunteers evaluated improvements in social interaction and learning.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social network density analysis was used to illustrate social interaction among participants.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Increased social interactions among children.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Positive results in learning of letters and numbers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Costescu et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr9"&gt;2017&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Romania&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;20 boys and 9 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(6&amp;#8211;12 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Keepon, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Specialised treatment centre, 6 &amp;#215; 2-hour weekly sessions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Frequency of correct strategies children used in a social situation; Frequency of used rational beliefs or irrational beliefs; Emotional Intensity Rating Scale; Frequency of using adaptive and behaviours&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Robot Enhanced Therapy is an effective way to reduce the negative emotion intensity associated with negative social events and help children with ASD to think in a more rational way compared to Treatment As Usual group.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) No differences between groups in adaptive behaviours and social knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;De Korte et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr10"&gt;2020&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Netherlands&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;37 boys and 7 females&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(3&amp;#8211;8 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;NAO, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Clinical setting, 20 &amp;#215; 45-minute sessions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social Responsive Scale&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Children in the robot-assisted PRT group showed a larger growth in functional self-initiations, compared to the PRT group.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) No difference between the two groups in growth of social self-initiations.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iii) Both PRT and robot-assisted PRT interventions were effective in improving social-communicative skills, with larger improvements in the robot-assisted PRT group.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Koch et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr25"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;United States&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;13 boys and 9 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(5&amp;#8211;12 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Socially Animated Machine, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Setting is unclear, 6 &amp;#215; 15&amp;#8211;25 sessions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Robot-based Emotion Skills Knowledge Task&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Significant improvement in accuracy for identifying face drawings and photos that corresponded with robotic emotional facial expressions on the R-BESK at post-intervention.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Children in intervention group did not display increased socially directed gaze with SAM compared to the control group post-intervention.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iii) Children in the intervention group did not show improved performance on standardised measures of affect recognition compared to control group post-intervention.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lecciso et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr28"&gt;2021&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Italy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;12 boys&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(6&amp;#8211;13 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Zeno R25, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Therapy room in a clinic, 9&amp;#8211;10 days&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Facial Emotion Recognition Task and Basic Emotions Production Task&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Both robot-based and video-based training perform similarly in promoting facial recognition and expression of basic emotions in children with ASD.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Marino et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr31"&gt;2020&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Italy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;12 boys and 2 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(4&amp;#8211;8 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;NAO, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;CBT in clinical setting, 12 &amp;#215; 90-minute sessions over 5 weeks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Test of Emotional Comprehension and Emotional Lexicon Test&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Significant improvements in contextualised emotion recognition, comprehension and emotional perspective-taking represented by TEC and ELT scores compared to control groups.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;So et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr44"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hong Kong&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;10 boys and 3 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(6&amp;#8211;12 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;NAO, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Treatment room in a school, 12 weeks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Total number of gestures each child recognised and video analysis and the total number of trials that children produced correct gestures&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Social robot (NAO) can teach gestural recognition and production effectively to children with low functioning ASD.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Intervention group was more likely to recognise the appropriate pantomime gestures that ought to be produced and to gesture accurately after training.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iii) Intervention group was also able to generalise the acquired recognition and production skills to the untrained scenarios; they could also identify the appropriate pantomime gestures produced by a human model.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iv) No strong evidence that they could produce gestures accurately when interacting with the human model.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yun et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr51"&gt;2017&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Korea&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;15 boys&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(4&amp;#8211;7 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;iRobiQ, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Clinical setting, 8 &amp;#215; 30- to 40-minute sessions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Korean version of the Vineland Adaptive Behaviours Scale;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social Communication Questionnaire;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social Responsiveness Scale;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Korean version of the Child Behaviour Checklist;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Video analysis for eye contact percentage&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Robot is equally effective as human at facilitating the behavioural interventions as noted in the positive effects on the eye contact, facial emotion recognition, which may suggest that robots are useful mediators of social skills training for children with ASD.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Robot engaged children in their treatment and maintained their interest in the reward system. There is a significant increased percentages of eye contact reflected the positive effects of this system, with better performances for eye contact with the robot compared to human therapist, especially in the first four sessions. The degrees of change in both the behavioural observations and parent-completed measures did not differ significantly between the groups.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" colspan="7"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;bold&gt;Single Case Research Design/Case Studies&lt;/bold&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Albo-canals et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr1"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Panama&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;11 boys and 1 girl&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(6&amp;#8211;14 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;KIBO, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Classroom, total of eight sessions over four consecutive days (two sessions each day)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Video analysis and Positive Technology Development Engagement Checklist&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Development of social relationship with adults.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Disengagement and failure to collaborate with peers and possessive behaviours of around KIBO.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iii) No improvement in social behaviour when collaborating with peers, healing to clean up, being respectful to others, and using materials responsibly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pop et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr38"&gt;2013&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Romania&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;3 boys&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(5&amp;#8211;6 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Probo, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Therapy room, 1&amp;#8211;2 h per session&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;A binary scale to assess emotion recognition in each animation&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Moderate to large improvement in identifying both sadness and happiness when Probo's active face was used compared to neutral face.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) There is a similar effect in increasing the performance of both "happy" and "sad" emotion recognitions using Probo's active face.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fachantidis et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr15"&gt;2020&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Greece&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;14 boys and 8 girls (9 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;LEGO bicycle robot, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;School classroom, 1&amp;#8211;2 h&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sociometric test&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Development of the social, communication and emotional skills of the child with ASD.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Increased interaction with others, more eye contact. Reduction in stereotypical movements, task avoidance, indifference to what is happening around him, excessive reactions to shouting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Giannopulu and Pradel (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr16"&gt;2012&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unclear&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;1 boy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(8 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;GIPY-1, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Therapy room in a hospital, 5 min&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Two independent judges' observations&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) No difference in duration in eye contact and touch between child-robot and child-robot-therapist interactions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Manipulation and Posture are better in child-robot than child-robot-therapist.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iii) Positive emotion is more easily expressed when the child interacts with the therapist and the robot than when the child interacts only with the robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Giannopulu et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr17"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Japan&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;27 boys and 13 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(7&amp;#8211;11 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pekoppa, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;A familiar room to children, 15 min per session&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Likert-scale to rate children's feeling&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Emotional feeling in ASD children was higher after the interaction with the robot.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kozima et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr27"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Japan&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(3 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Keepon, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Playroom in a day care centre, 15&amp;#8211;39 sessions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Video analysis of children's interactions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Spontaneous dyadic interactions such as touching Keepon with a xylophone stick, and interpersonally triggered dyadic interaction, such as putting a paper cylinder on its head, suggesting that child was a good observer of others' behaviour.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Triadic interactions observed where Keepon or its action functioned as a pivot for interpersonal interactions between child and her mother or therapist. Child shared with the adults the "wonder" she had experienced with Keepon. This "wonder" induced smile, laughter, or other emotive responses in herself and her interaction partner. There is also a unidirectional "imitation play" observed where Keepon was the imitator and child was the model.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kewalramani et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr23"&gt;2023&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Australia and England&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Dash robot, Alpha Mini robot and Cozmo robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hospitalised children, Home-based and early childhood and kindergarten classrooms&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Qualitative Video analysis of children's interactions, drawings, and constructions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The robot therapy acts as a platform focusing on robot-child interactions (operated by the caregiver/EC professional) rather than a fully robot-assisted intervention. The robot's prompting (e.g., talking, smiling, laughing and expressing emotions) provides an interesting stimulant for children who have difficulties&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;engaging socially.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Children are provided with opportunities to collaborate with their peers (e.g., via role-play or by exercising choice and control when coding the robot to perform&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;tasks), and this was mostly evident with the English data, communicated feelings and emotions, and regulated behaviour &amp;#8211; important for social-emotional learning and communication skills development.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Scassellati et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr41"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;United States&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;7 boys and 5 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(6&amp;#8211;12 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jibo, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Participants' home, 30-minute for 30 consecutive days&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;A validated, naturalistic joint attention assessment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Increased social skill performance between child and caregivers, including more eye contact, more attempts to initiate communication, and more frequent responses to communication bids from the caregiver.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Caregivers reported increased social skill performance between their children and other people including more eye contact, more attempts to initiate communication, and more frequent responses to communication bids from other people.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Soares et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr45"&gt;2019&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Portugal&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;9 girls and 36 boys&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(5&amp;#8211;10 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;ZECA, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Primary schools and clinics, twice a week for three weeks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Video analysis using a special software &amp;#8211; The Observer XT from Noldus&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Developed visual facial expression recognition.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Children with ASD elicit and imitate facial expression from robot.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iii) Helped the children understand the perspective of the character in the story.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iv) Encourage the acquisition of facial expressions recognition skill.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Vanderborght et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr49"&gt;2012&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Romania&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 boys and 2 girls&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(4&amp;#8211;8 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Probo, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Therapy room, 20 min per session&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Video analysis and measurements of the level of prompting&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) Decreased the level of prompting the therapist needed to offer to each child to perform the target behaviour.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Improved social abilities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Zorcec et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr52"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Macedonia&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;1 boy and 1 girl&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(2&amp;#8211;3 years old)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kaspar, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;University Children's Hospital, 20 min per session&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Observations from parents and clinicians&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Learnt basic communication skills like greetings, and basic emotions that resulted with more calm and happy behaviour during the intervention sessions. Children demonstrated greetings as well as recognition and appropriate reactions to happy and sad emotions in daily life.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p>Table 3 List of robots used and their features in the selected studies</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Robot Feature&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;KiliRO,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;KiliRo is an animal inspired robot, a green parrot. It can twist its head and is equipped with a WIFI camera that can rotate up to 180 degrees. It can respond to user commands and touches. It is also equipped with a speaker and capable of recognising voices.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Keepon,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Keepon is an animal inspired robot (a yellow duck). It is responsive to touches such as pokes, pats, and tickles, and will respond with a great variety of emotional movement and sounds. Keepon is also capable of dancing; it can synchronise its movement to a musical beat or rhythm, or clapping.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;NAO,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Nao is a small robot that can interact with users. It is equipped with sensors to respond to users through walking, dancing, speaking, and recognising faces and objects. It is equipped with an infrared sensor, speaker, and microphones&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Zeno R25, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Zeno R25 is an interactive robot that can interact with its users in an intuitive way and respond by detecting and mimicking the user's emotions. It has microphones, speakers, infrared distance sensors, and a touch sensitive area.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;iRobiQ, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;iRobiQ is a highly interactive robot that has 5 facial expressions: happy, surprised, neutral, disappointed, and shy. It is equipped with sensors and is capable of moving around and avoiding obstacles. It can make telephone calls, play videos, show photos, and link with other compatible electronic devices.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;KIBO, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;KIBO is a robot with an expressive face that can be transformed into anything that the child imagines or that fits into any lesson plan. It can navigate on its own, understands spoken commands, and can provide hugs to the user.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Probo, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Probo is a robot that was built to focus on physical and cognitive human-robot interactions, especially in hospital settings. It responds to touches and provides hugs. It is also capable of expressing emotions, and feels like a stuffed animal.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;LEGO bicycle robot, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;LEGO blocks open the possibility of transforming children's imagination into an actual product. There are critical roles that children can play when engaging with LEGO, such as reading the instructions, identifying the correct block, and constructing them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pekoppa, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pekoppa is a small plant robot that can act as your best listening friend. It has a minimalistic design and can respond to you. It can react to users' speech through moving its leaves and stem. A deep 'bow' means it is showing agreement with the user.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jibo, non-humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jibo can perform many social interactions according to the users' engagement. It is equipped with cameras and microphones, can recognise the users' face, understand speeches, and can dance. It can form an emotional bond with users.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;ZECA, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Zeca is made of a special polymer that gives it a face that closely resembles a human skin and face. It is capable of expressing gestures and different emotions such as being happy, scared, and angry. It is equipped with speakers and can respond to its users with human-like reactions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kaspar, humanoid robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kaspar is a child-sized robot with an expressive face. It is equipped with cameras in its eyes and has force-sensing sensors that can respond to a user's touch. It also features a full body that can respond and move along with the user.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Dash &amp;#8211; Coding Robot&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Children can give Dash Robot voice commands and explore loops, events, conditions, and sequences with the five free apps that come with the robot. The function of the robot not only supports children in learning how to code, but also explore their problem-solving skills and encourage language interactions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cozmo&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cozmo is a wireless robot. It includes a robot and cubic that can be programmed to move around. It is&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;controlled by a tablet-based app. However, it also can be controlled by touch or voice recognition.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Alpha Mini&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;A wireless AI robot (with voice and face recognition) that can be coded via an app to perform a variety of&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;actions. For example, it can demonstrate, and model play activities such as meditation, mindfulness activities, and exercises such as Taichi. It can also demonstrate, model, and teach emotions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p>The findings were organised into three major themes: robotics technologies and social skill development, robotics technologies and emotional skill development, and robotics technologies and cognitive skill development.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-13">Theme 1: Robotics Technologies and Social Skill Development</hd> <p>Of the 19 studies included in this scoping review (refer to Table 2), 11 studies evaluated the use of robotics technologies to support child development of social skills, including social interactions, communication, and the development of friendships. In five of these studies, interventions involving Nao robots proved effective in improving social-communicative skills (e.g., De Korte et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref38">10</reflink>]; So et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref39">44</reflink>]). Additionally, some behavioural intervention studies employed robots as facilitators for behaviours in children with ASD, such as the study conducted by Yun et al. ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref40">51</reflink>]). In that study, the feasibility of embedding a robotics system into a social skills training program was explored, utilising the iRobiQ humanoid robot as a facilitator to address areas like eye contact and facial emotion recognition. So et al. ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref41">44</reflink>]) employed the Nao social robot to teach gestural recognition and production to autistic children, resulting in accurate recognition of appropriate pantomime gestures. Through the narration of novel stories by the Nao robot, children were told to imitate the gestures during the RAT training. The study showed an increase in children's verbal imitation and language skills after the completion of robot-based training.</p> <p>A notable study by Scassellati et al. ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref42">41</reflink>]) focused on the Jibo robot, a social robot exhibiting expressive behaviours through body movements, a ring of colour-changing LED lights, and animated eyes. The intervention involved interactive games aimed at teaching children social gaze behaviours, sharing attention, and fostering social and emotional understanding. The results indicated improved social skills performance (such as increased eye contact), more attempts to initiate communication, and greater responsiveness to communication bids from parents or caregivers.</p> <p>Fachantidis et al. ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref43">15</reflink>]) employed Lego robotics in a classroom-based environment, which included one autistic child among 22 participants. This study diverged in its focus by exploring whether the use of Lego robotics could enhance the educational adjustment of the autistic child, promoting the development of communication and social skills while reducing undesirable behaviours. Furthermore, the study examined whether non-autistic children's indifferent attitudes towards the autistic child changed as collaborative relationships developed. The results indicated positive changes in the non-autistic children's attitudes after the intervention, along with improvements in the autistic child's social communication skills. The autistic child exhibited an increased inclination to communicate with peers and adults, willingly explained their tasks, demonstrated greater cooperation within the team, shared materials, remained engaged at their workstation, and displayed increased eye contact. Post-intervention, there was also a decrease in task avoidance, indifference to surroundings, and excessive reactions to shouting.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-14">Theme 2: Robotics Technologies and Emotional Skill Development</hd> <p>Of the 19 studies, 10 included content relating to autistic children's emotional learning needs, including understanding emotions, emotive responses, and expressing emotions (e.g., Anamaria et al., 2013; Lecciso et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref44">28</reflink>]). Emotional understandings of children also featured social interactions and expressing emotions, but occurred mostly in clinical settings, and far less in natural contexts like engaging with peers, siblings, or other adults. For example, in an older study conducted by Kozima et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref45">27</reflink>]) in playroom day-care centres, autistic children's interactions with the robot induced smiles, laughter, or other emotive responses in the child. There were also aspects of imitation play observed where Keepon the robot was the imitator and the child became an agentic model, modelling actions for the robot to imitate — which revealed the child was beginning to learn observational skills that enabled emotive responses. No studies since the Kozima et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref46">27</reflink>]) study have portrayed the image of an autistic child as agentic who teaches the robot skills the child has observed and learnt. Contrastingly, studies employing humanoid robots in clinical one-on-one settings have specific aims: teaching children to express emotions like smiling and laughing (4 et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref47">26</reflink>]; Lecciso et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref48">28</reflink>]). These interventions utilise implied social scenarios through storytelling (Kewalramani et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref49">22</reflink>]) and integrate computer-based training to assist children in self-regulating and diminishing the intensity of their negative emotions (Costescu et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref50">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>Only two studies were found where children's learning of basic emotional skills (such as recognition of emotions learnt through observations) were understood by allowing children to depict their understandings in multimodal ways using, for example, drawings (Kewalramani et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref51">23</reflink>]; Koch, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref52">26</reflink>]). Another study (Marino et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref53">31</reflink>]) employed the Nao robot with 4–8-year-olds in a simulated imaginary play context where children role-played as a co-therapist teaching age-appropriate skills such as turn-taking, directing attention, delivering cues, and prompting and reinforcing adequate responses and behaviours in an interactive environment. The robot was used as a means of demonstrating appropriate emotions to the children. However, the intervention was still delivered in clinical settings, thus underpinning a medical model of using robotics to 'fix' children and explicit teaching of emotional comprehension.</p> <p>It is crucial to understand if and how autistic children can develop emotional skills, such as visual facial expression recognition and comprehension, with a robot compared to without a robot, either after intervention or in parallel. Simulated social storytelling and game-based scenarios, conducted in real-world settings, have been shown to aid children in understanding a character's perspective in a story and practicing the skills acquired with their peers. However, very few studies, such as Vanderborght et al. ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref54">49</reflink>]), have demonstrated this. The children's performance in all the studies provides strong evidence of the robot being a valuable tool to encourage the acquisition of facial expressions recognition skills and the imitation of facial expressions.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-15">Theme 3: Robotics Technologies and Cognitive Skill Development</hd> <p>Of the 19 studies, three included content relating to autistic children's cognitive-learning skills, such as recognition of letters and numbers (Albo-Canals et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref55">1</reflink>]; Bharatharaj et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref56">6</reflink>]) and problem-solving skills (Kewalramani et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref57">23</reflink>]). Albo-Canals et al. ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref58">1</reflink>]) found that when a hands-on screen-free coding robot, KIBO, was used with children with autism, it served as a social actor that carried out defined problem-solving tasks in various classroom play-based settings. In contrast to studies that employed a medical model for intervention (Costescu et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref59">9</reflink>]; Marino et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref60">31</reflink>]), the study used a child-centred approach where children were observed to see whether they were applying their learning to new situations of their own choice. The KIBO robot also played a role as a social agent through interactive play-based activities related to real-life situations. Although the intervention took place in a regular classroom setting — whereby in part of the intervention, children interacted with their teachers as social others together with the robot as the social agent — there is a need for longitudinal studies to track autistic children as they begin to learn to form social relationships with peers in the context of robotics play experiences. Future studies should compare robot-interaction sessions with non-autistic children to autistic children's interactions. Longer sessions with a larger sample that compares each child's different social, emotional, and cognitive levels should also be considered (Albo-Canals et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref61">1</reflink>]; Bharatharaj et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref62">6</reflink>]).</p> <p>In summary, the current scoping review provided evidence that robotics technology can be employed effectively to improve social, emotional, and cognitive learning outcomes in autistic children. In the forthcoming sections, we discuss and pose the need for more research to understand the long-term impacts of RAT interventions and how they can be adapted for use in real-life settings such as schools and homes.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-16">Discussion</hd> <p>The purpose of the current scoping review was to identify and appraise existing research on the use of robots to support the development of social and emotional skills in children with autism. We identified 19 unique studies that met our inclusion criteria. Several key findings were evident across three themes. In Theme 1, robotics technologies, including Nao and iRobiQ humanoid robots, showed evidence for enhancing social-communicative skills and social skills training for autistic children. In Theme 2, emotional skill development was facilitated by robots in clinical settings, teaching children how to express emotions and practice self-regulation. In Theme 3, hands-on coding robots, such as KIBO, supported the development of cognitive skills and showed promise for helping children with autism complete problem-solving tasks in classroom settings. The findings of the current study provide useful information about different types of robots and how they might be used to facilitate the delivery of SEL interventions to children with autism.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-17">Strengths of the Included Studies</hd> <p>The studies evaluating the use of robotics for developing social and emotional skills in children with autism included in the current review had several noteworthy strengths. First, the included studies used robots to model and teach a variety of social-emotional skills, demonstrating that robots might have diverse applications when used as part of an autism intervention program. For example, some studies (Fachantidis et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref63">15</reflink>]; Scassellati et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref64">41</reflink>]) focused on the areas of letter and number recognition, problem-solving skills, and coding. In other studies (Albo-Canals et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref65">1</reflink>]; Bharatharaj et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref66">6</reflink>]), a hands-on coding robot showed potential for improving cognitive skills. Second, some studies (Costescu et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref67">9</reflink>]; Marino et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref68">31</reflink>]) showed that robots offer consistent and predictable interactions, which allow for a high number of teaching opportunities, possibly enhancing learning outcomes for children with autism. Robots can repeat tasks and instructions as many times as needed, providing ample opportunities for practice and reinforcement of skills. Finally, the robots used in the included studies provided visual and multimodal cues that may be helpful for children with autism and aid in the comprehension of social and emotional concepts.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-18">Limitations of the Included Studies</hd> <p>Although the studies included in the current review showed some encouraging results, several limitations were noted. First, many of the included studies had small sample sizes, which may limit the generalisability of the findings. Children with autism are a heterogeneous group, and small samples may not adequately represent this diversity. Secondly, some included studies (e.g., Albo-Canals et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref69">1</reflink>]; Lecciso et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref70">28</reflink>]) focused on short-term outcomes, providing limited information about the long-term effects of robotics interventions. Understanding how these interventions impact children's development over time is an important area for future research. Third, few studies employed randomised control trial methods and lacked control groups, making it challenging to determine if improvements are solely due to the robotics intervention, or other factors or intervention components. Fourth, few studies assessed maintenance and generalisation of intervention effects. For example, Giannopulu and Pradel ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref71">16</reflink>]) and Zorcec et al. ([<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref72">52</reflink>]) found that robotics technologies can be an effective augmentative mediator to improve social-emotional understanding in autistic children in contexts where real-life social interactions are limited to interventions, such as within a clinical setting. Although studies may show improvements in controlled settings, it's essential to determine if these skills generalise to real-life situations and interactions with peers, family, and community members. Finally, different studies used various robotics platforms, making it difficult to compare results across studies. The effectiveness of one robot for supporting the development of one skill may not generalise to another skill.</p> <p>Based on the findings, strengths, and limitations of the current review, we provide a set of preliminary evidence-informed recommendations for practice and describe potential fruitful areas for future research.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-19">Recommendations for Practice</hd> <p>First, practitioners should consider using robots as part of a multi-component intervention that includes other evidence-based teaching strategies. For example, practitioners might integrate robots into skill building programs that also include strategies such as goal setting, prompting, prompt fading, and positive reinforcement. Practitioners should ensure that skills learned through interactions with the robot can generalise to real-life social situations with peers and family members. Therefore, rather than using robots in isolation, practitioners could incorporate opportunities for the child to practice these skills with peers and family members and in other social contexts.</p> <p>Practitioners should also carefully consider the type of robot selected for use in intervention programs for different children. Care should be taken to select robotics platforms that align with the child's age, developmental level, and the specific goals of the intervention. To do so, practitioners may need to consider factors such as the robot's appearance, size, and interaction capabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-20">Recommendations for Future Research</hd> <p>More research in real-life settings, such as classrooms, needs to be conducted to enable the understanding of children's authentic social and emotional learning experiences. The presence of human interaction alongside robots has been found to enhance emotional expression and learning. Further studies should explore the transferability of learned emotional skills to real-life situations and consider incorporating humanised approaches in robotics interventions. Future research should observe how children with autism would split their attention and interact in small groups that can promote their social interactions with peers in real-classroom environments (Lecciso et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref73">28</reflink>]; So et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref74">44</reflink>]). Whilst it is important to conduct studies in clinical settings, Giannopulu and Pradel ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref75">16</reflink>]) suggest that positive emotion can more easily be expressed when the child interacts with a therapist and robot rather than the robot alone. Robotics interventions should include a human presence as the social other to enable authentic social and emotional learning. More studies incorporating such a humanised approach while considering robotics as authentic assistive technologies are needed. Next, there is also a need to investigate the relationship between the functions of the robots and their effects on autistic children, as well as regarding the interactions between the child, robot, and adults/peers. It is crucial for us to understand if and how autistic children can develop emotional skills and whether these learned skills are transferable to real-life situations.</p> <p>With robots playing an increasingly diverse range of roles in our lives, there is a need to broaden the scope of robotics interventions for autistic children beyond clinical and hospital settings. One potential avenue for future research is to explore the use of robotics technology within classrooms and community-based environments to facilitate more diverse interactions involving both children and adults. Another strategy involves capitalising on the multimodal characteristics of robots, such as digital touch, movement, sound, and visuals, to enable educators and parents to use robot-assisted play as an explicit teaching method. Interventions should involve sessions that acknowledge children's voices (verbal/non-verbal) and ideas (through drawings) and incorporate various play scenarios (Bers et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref76">5</reflink>]; McReynolds et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref77">33</reflink>]) to help children develop a repertoire of new knowledge and behaviours. For example, some of the play scenarios could include imitation and turn-taking games, learning emotions, sounds and words in multimodal ways (Bers et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref78">5</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-21">Strengths and Limitations of the Current Study</hd> <p>The strength of the evidence in this scoping review was primarily based on eight case studies and two pre-test and post-test studies examining interventions using robotics technology with autistic children. The successful interventions identified within this review focused on various aspects, such as emotional cognition, social skills, and communication. However, the current body of literature has several limitations, including a focus on a narrow age range, a predominantly clinical context, and a lack of longitudinal studies. Future research should address these limitations by exploring the long-term impact of robotic interventions, designing adaptive and personalised interventions, and fostering professional development for educators, parents, and health professionals in using robotics technology as evidence-based interventions. Due to the limitation in available research with the age group (0–8 years old) that was included in this paper, the current review could not ascertain the strengths and challenges that might occur, and whether RAT could provide a continuity of learning effects over time. Hence, there is a need to adopt an adaptive response approach in designing robot-assisted technology and play scenarios tailored to individual needs rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.</p> <p>Despite the potential benefits of RAT, some challenges and critiques associated with its use have been raised. Robots may be interactive, but they are still machines and cannot fully replicate the complexity of human social interactions. Some critics argue that relying too heavily on interactions with robots may hinder the development of social skills and inhibit the autistic individual's ability to engage with humans in a meaningful way (Elder, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref79">14</reflink>]). Others have argued that the focus on technology and robots in therapy may overshadow the importance of human connection and social engagement. They argue that human-to-human interactions and interventions should not be replaced or devalued by the presence of robots (Begum et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref80">4</reflink>]). Additionally, the cost of acquiring and maintaining advanced robotic systems can be a significant barrier to widespread implementation. Many settings may not have the financial resources to afford these technologies, limiting access to robot-assisted therapy for many autistic individuals (Dickstein-Fischer et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref81">12</reflink>]). Further research is needed to understand the long-term outcomes, including the generalisation of skills, maintenance of progress, and the impact on overall well-being.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-22">Conclusions</hd> <p>This scoping review sheds light on the growing field of robotics technology research and its potential to develop effective interventions for young autistic children. The evidence reviewed underscores the importance of embracing a more diverse range of settings, such as classrooms and community-based environments, to foster richer child–robot interactions and promote learning of social, emotional, and cognitive skills. Additionally, capitalising on the multimodal characteristics of robots and adopting adaptive response approaches tailored to individual needs can significantly enhance these interventions. Potential studies should also adopt a strength-based approach where the child is agentic to teach the robot, not just uni-directional learning within the child–robot interactions. Intervention should also evaluate the improvements in autistic children's learning of the skills needed for organic assimilation into classroom environments. Hence, interventions should take a blended approach and should be needs-based. For example, a combination of 1:1 clinical and classroom-based interventions should be researched, ensuring children can practise and apply learnt skills via the interventions in the classroom as well as the clinical setting. Overall, the potential of robotics technologies to improve the lives of autistic children is promising (Pennisi et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref82">37</reflink>]). With continued advancements in the field and further research into the implementation and sustainability of these interventions, robotics technologies hold the potential to significantly enhance the support and learning opportunities available to autistic children, ultimately improving their quality of life, and promoting more inclusive learning environments.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-23">Declarations</hd> <p>The authors acknowledge having no financial interest or benefit arising from the direct applications of this research. This research received funding from Monash University's Capacity Building Grant from the School of Educational Psychology and Counselling for research assistance.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-24">Ethics Approval</hd> <p>The project did not need ethical clearance as the study did not involve any human participants.</p> <hd id="AN0180804687-25">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0180804687-26"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref55" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Albo-Canals J, Martelo AB, Relkin E, Hannon D, Heerink M, Heinemann M, Leidl K, Bers MU. A pilot study of the KIBO robot in children with severe ASD. International Journal of Social Robotics. 2018; 10: 371-383. 10.1007/s12369-018-0479-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref31" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anzalone SM, Boucenna S, Ivaldi S, Chetouani M. Evaluating the engagement with social robots. International Journal of Social Robotics. 2015; 7: 465-478. 10.1007/s12369-015-0298-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref2" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Baldassarri S, Passerino L, Ramis S, Riquelme I, Perales FJ. Toward emotional interactive videogames for children with autism spectrum disorder. Universal Access in the Information Society. 2021; 20: 239-254. 10.1007/s10209-020-00725-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref80" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Begum M, Serna RW, Yanco HA. Are robots ready to deliver autism interventions? A comprehensive review. International Journal of Social Robotics. 2016; 8: 157-181. 10.1007/s12369-016-0346-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref76" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bers, M. U. (2022). Beyond coding: How children learn human values through programming. MIT Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref7" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bharatharaj J, Huang L, Mohan RE, Al-Jumaily A, Krägeloh C. Robot-assisted therapy for learning and social interaction of children with autism spectrum disorder. Robotics. 2017; 6; 1: 4. 10.3390/robotics6010004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref5" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Black MH, Milbourn B, Chen NT, McGarry S, Wali F, Ho AS, Girdler S. The use of wearable technology to measure and support abilities, disabilities and functional skills in autistic youth: A scoping review. Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology. 2020; 8; 1: 48-69. 10.21307/sjcapp-2020-006. 7685500. 33520778</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref11" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Cavioni V, Grazzani I, Ornaghi V. Social and emotional learning for children with learning disability: Implications for inclusion. International Journal of Emotional Education. 2017; 9; 2: 100-109</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref50" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Costescu, C. A, Vanderborght, B, &amp; David, D. O. (2017). Robot-enhanced CBT for dysfunctional emotions in social situations for children with ASD. Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies, 17(2).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> De Korte MW, van den Berk-Smeekens I, van Dongen-Boomsma M, Oosterling IJ, Boer D, Barakova JC, Lourens EI, Buitelaar T, Glennon JK, Staal WG. Self-initiations in young children with autism during pivotal response treatment with and without robot assistance. Autism. 2020; 24; 8: 2117-2128. 10.1177/1362361320935006. 32730096</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dechsling, A, Orm, S, Kalandadze, T, Sütterlin, S, Øien, R. A, Shic, F, &amp; Nordahl-Hansen, A. (2021). Virtual and augmented reality in social skills interventions for individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A scoping review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1–16.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dickstein-Fischer LA, Crone-Todd DE, Chapman IM, Fathima AT, Fischer GS. Socially assistive robots: Current status and future prospects for autism interventions. Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Health. 2018; 5: 15-25. 10.2147/IEH.S138753</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Durlak JA, Weissberg RP, Dymnicki AB, Taylor RD, Schellinger KB. The impact of enhancing students' social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development. 2011; 82; 1: 405-432. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x. 21291449</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Elder, A. M. (2017). Friendship, robots, and social media: False friends and second selves. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fachantidis N, Syriopoulou-Delli CK, Vezyrtzis I, Zygopoulou M. Beneficial effects of robot-mediated class activities on a child with ASD and his typical classmates. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities. 2020; 66; 3: 245-253. 10.1080/20473869.2019.1565725</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Giannopulu I, Pradel G. From child–robot interaction to child–robot therapist interaction: A case study in autism. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics. 2012; 9; 2: 173-179. 10.1155/2012/682601</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Giannopulu I, Terada K, Watanabe T. Emotional empathy as a mechanism of synchronisation in child–robot interaction. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018; 9: 1852. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01852. 6232761. 30459664</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Greenberg, M. T, Domitrovich, C. E, Weissberg, R. P, &amp; Durlak, J. A. (2017). Social and emotional learning as a public health approach to education. The Future of Children, 13–32.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoorn JF. Theory of robot communication: I. The medium is the communication partner. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics. 2020; 17; 06: 2050026. 10.1142/S0219843620500267</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huijnen CA, Lexis MA, de Witte LP. Matching robot KASPAR to autism spectrum disorder (ASD) therapy and educational goals. International Journal of Social Robotics. 2016; 8: 445-455. 10.1007/s12369-016-0369-4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kahveci G, Bulut Serin N, Akkus O. Using a tablet-mediated intervention for teaching pre-addition skills to children with autism. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn). 2023; 17; 1: 35-43. 10.11591/edulearn.v17i1.20509</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kewalramani, S, Palaiologou, I, Dardanou, M, Allen, K. A, &amp; Phillipson, S. (2021). Using robotic toys in early childhood education to support children's social and emotional competencies. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood. https://doi.org/10.1177/18369391211056668</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kewalramani, S, Palaiologou, I, &amp; Dardanou, M. (2023). The integration of internet of toys in early childhood education: Research from Australia, Norway, and England. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003185840</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim ES, Berkovits LD, Bernier EP, Leyzberg D, Shic F, Paul R, Scassellati B. Social robots as embedded reinforcers of social behavior in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2013; 43: 1038-1049. 10.1007/s10803-012-1645-2. 23111617</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koch, A, Cascorbi, I, Westhofen, M, Dafotakis, M, Klapa, S, &amp; Kuhtz-Buschbeck, J. P. (2018). The neurophysiology and treatment of motion sickness. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2018.0687</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koch SA, Stevens CE, Clesi CD, Lebersfeld JB, Sellers AG, McNew ME, Biasini FJ, Amthor FR, Hopkins MI. A feasibility study evaluating the emotionally expressive robot SAM. International Journal of Social Robotics. 2017; 9: 601-613. 10.1007/s12369-017-0419-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kozima H, Nakagawa C, Yasuda Y. Children–robot interaction: A pilot study in autism therapy. Progress in Brain Research. 2007; 164: 385-400. 10.1016/S0079-6123(07)64021-7. 17920443</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lecciso, F, Levante, A, Fabio, R. A, Caprì, T, Leo, M, Carcagnì, P, Distante, C, Mazzeo, P. L, Spagnolo, P, &amp; Petrocchi, S. (2021). Emotional expression in children with ASD: A pre-study on a two-group pre-post-test design comparing robot-based and computer-based training. Frontiers in Psychology, 2826.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lord C, Elsabbagh M, Baird G, Veenstra-Vanderweele J. Autism spectrum disorder. The Lancet. 2018; 392; 10146: 508-520. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31129-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marino, C, Canale, N, Melodia, F, Spada, M. M, &amp; Vieno, A. (2021). The overlap between problematic smartphone use and problematic social media use: A systematic review. Current Addiction Reports, 8, 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-021-00398-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marino F, Chilà P, Sfrazzetto ST, Carrozza C, Crimi I, Failla C, Busà M, Bernava G, Tartarisco G, Vagni D. Outcomes of a robot-assisted social-emotional understanding intervention for young children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2020; 50: 1973-1987. 10.1007/s10803-019-03953-x. 30852783</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mazefsky CA, Herrington J, Siegel M, Scarpa A, Maddox BB, Scahill L, White SW. The role of emotion regulation in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child &amp; Adolescent Psychiatry. 2013; 52; 7: 679-688. 10.1016/j.jaac.2013.05.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McReynolds, E, Hubbard, S, Lau, T, Saraf, A, Cakmak, M, &amp; Roesner, F. (2017). Toys that listen: A study of parents, children, and internet-connected toys. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 5197–5207.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mondi CF, Giovanelli A, Reynolds AJ. Fostering socio-emotional learning through early childhood intervention. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy. 2021; 15; 1: 1-43. 10.1186/s40723-021-00084-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Munn Z, Peters MD, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2018; 18: 1-7. 10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parsons D, Wilson NJ, Vaz S, Lee H, Cordier R. Appropriateness of the TOBY application, an iPad intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder: A thematic approach. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2019; 49; 10: 4053-4066. 10.1007/s10803-019-04115-9. 31289988</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pennisi P, Tonacci A, Tartarisco G, Billeci L, Ruta L, Gangemi S, Pioggia G. Autism and Social Robotics: A systematic review. Autism Research. 2016. 10.1002/aur.1527. 26483270</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pop CA, Simut R, Pintea S, Saldien J, Rusu A, David D, Vanderfaeillie J, Lefeber D, Vanderborght B. Can the social robot Probo help children with autism to identify situation-based emotions? A series of single case experiments. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics. 2013; 10; 03: 1350025. 10.1142/S0219843613500254</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Saldana, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4 ed.). Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Saleh MA, Hanapiah FA, Hashim H. Robot applications for autism: A comprehensive review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. 2021; 16; 6: 580-602. 32706602</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Scassellati B, Boccanfuso L, Huang CM, Mademtzi M, Qin M, Salomons N, Ventola P, Shic F. Improving social skills in children with ASD using a long-term, in-home social robot. Science Robotics. 2018; 3; 21: eaat7544. 10.1126/scirobotics.aat7544. 10957097. 33141724</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shamsuddin S, Yussof H, Ismail LI, Mohamed S, Hanapiah FA, Zahari NI. Humanoid robot NAO interacting with autistic children of moderately impaired intelligence to augment communication skills. Procedia Engineering. 2012; 41: 1533-1538. 10.1016/j.proeng.2012.07.346</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shamsuddin S, Yussof H, Ismail LI, Mohamed S, Hanapiah FA, Zahari NI. Initial response in HRI-a case study on evaluation of child with autism spectrum disorders interacting with a humanoid robot Nao. Procedia Engineering. 2012; 41: 1448-1455. 10.1016/j.proeng.2012.07.334</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> So WC, Wong MKY, Lam WY, Cheng CH, Yang JH, Huang Y, Ng P, Wong WL, Ho CL, Yeung KL. Robot-based intervention may reduce delay in the production of intransitive gestures in chinese-speaking preschoolers with autism spectrum disorder. Molecular Autism. 2018; 9; 1: 1-16. 10.1186/s13229-018-0217-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Soares FO, Costa SC, Santos CP, Pereira APS, Hiolle AR, Silva V. Socio-emotional development in high functioning children with autism spectrum disorders using a humanoid robot. Interaction Studies. 2019; 20; 2: 205-233. 10.1075/is.15003.cos</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Syriopoulou-Delli CK, Gkiolnta E. Review of assistive technology in the training of children with autism spectrum disorders. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities. 2022; 68; 2: 73-85. 10.1080/20473869.2019.1706333. 35309695</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> van den Berk-Smeekens I, van Dongen-Boomsma M, De Korte MW, Boer D, Oosterling JC, Peters-Scheffer IJ, Glennon NC. Adherence and acceptability of a robot-assisted pivotal response treatment protocol for children with autism spectrum disorder. Scientific Reports. 2020; 10; 1: 1-11</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vanderborght B, Simut R, Saldien J, Pop C, Rusu AS, Pintea S, Lefeber D, David DO. Interaction Studies. 2012; 13; 3: 348-372. 10.1075/is.13.3.02van</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Whitehouse, A, Varcin, K, Waddington, H, Sulek, R, Bent, C, Ashburner, J, Eapen, V, Goodall, E, Hudry, K, Roberts, J, Silove, N, &amp; Trembath, D. (2020). Interventions for children on the autism spectrum: A synthesis of research evidence. Autism CRC, Brisbane, 2020.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yun SS, Choi J, Park SK, Bong GY, Yoo H. Social skills training for children with autism spectrum disorder using a robotic behavioral intervention system. Autism Research. 2017; 10; 7: 1306-1323. 10.1002/aur.1778. 28464438</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zorcec, T, Robins, B, &amp; Dautenhahn, K. (2018). Getting engaged: Assisted play with a humanoid robot Kaspar for children with severe autism. ICT Innovations 2018. Engineering and Life Sciences: 10th International Conference, ICT Innovations 2018, Ohrid, Macedonia, September 17–19, 2018, Proceedings 10, 198–207.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Sarika Kewalramani; Kelly-Ann Allen; Erin Leif and Andrea Ng</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref81"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1447825 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: A Scoping Review of the Use of Robotics Technologies for Supporting Social-Emotional Learning in Children with Autism – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sarika+Kewalramani%22">Sarika Kewalramani</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4937-3364">0000-0002-4937-3364</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kelly-Ann+Allen%22">Kelly-Ann Allen</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6813-0034">0000-0002-6813-0034</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Erin+Leif%22">Erin Leif</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2219-2405">0000-0003-2219-2405</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Andrea+Ng%22">Andrea Ng</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9514-778X">0000-0002-9514-778X</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Autism+and+Developmental+Disorders%22"><i>Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders</i></searchLink>. 2024 54(12):4481-4495. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 15 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Information Analyses – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Robotics%22">Robotics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Emotional+Learning%22">Social Emotional Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Autism+Spectrum+Disorders%22">Autism Spectrum Disorders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Children%22">Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Processes%22">Cognitive Processes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Skill+Development%22">Skill Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Technology+Uses+in+Education%22">Technology Uses in Education</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1007/s10803-023-06193-2 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0162-3257<br />1573-3432 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: This scoping review synthesises the current research into robotics technologies for promoting social-emotional learning in children with autism spectrum disorder. It examines the types of robotics technologies employed, their applications, and the gaps in the existing literature. Our scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. The systematic search of relevant databases allowed us to identify studies that use robotics technologies for fostering social, emotional, and cognitive skills in young children with autism. Our review has revealed that various robots, such as Nao, Kaspar, and Zeno, have been used to support the development of social and emotional skills through imitation games, turn-taking, joint attention, emotional recognition, and conversation. As most of these studies were conducted in clinical settings, there is a need for further research in classroom and community-based environments. Additionally, the literature calls for more high-quality longitudinal studies to assess the long-term effectiveness and sustainability of robot-assisted therapy and to assess adaptive and personalised interventions tailored to individual needs. More emphasis is recommended on professional development for educators, parents, and health professionals to incorporate robotics technologies as evidence-based interventions as a pathway for creating inclusive learning environments for children with autism. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1447825 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1447825 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10803-023-06193-2 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 15 StartPage: 4481 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Robotics Type: general – SubjectFull: Social Emotional Learning Type: general – SubjectFull: Autism Spectrum Disorders Type: general – SubjectFull: Children Type: general – SubjectFull: Cognitive Processes Type: general – SubjectFull: Skill Development Type: general – SubjectFull: Technology Uses in Education Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: A Scoping Review of the Use of Robotics Technologies for Supporting Social-Emotional Learning in Children with Autism Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Sarika Kewalramani – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Kelly-Ann Allen – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Erin Leif – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Andrea Ng IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 12 Type: published Y: 2024 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0162-3257 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1573-3432 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 54 – Type: issue Value: 12 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
