Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Jenny L. Gibson

Publications and source records attributed to Jenny L. Gibson.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Designing Social Robots for Inclusive Child Wellbeing Assessment: Insights from Communities Supporting Developmental Language Disorder and Forced Migration

Assessing children's wellbeing and mental health can be particularly challenging for children experiencing communication barriers, such as children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) and children with forced migration backgrounds. During the assessment process, traditional self-report questionnaires place substantial demands on language comprehension and verbal expression. In this context, social robots have emerged as a promising tool for supporting wellbeing assessment without solely relying on self-report questionnaires, yet limited research has examined how such interactions can be designed to be inclusive, appropriate, and ethically acceptable for children with diverse communication needs. To address this gap, we created candidate child--robot interaction activities as design probes and conducted focus groups with parents and professionals supporting children with DLD and children with forced migration backgrounds. Through thematic analysis, we identified considerations relating to robot role and capabilities, interactional dynamics, individual differences, and child agency, alongside population-specific considerations shaped by children's communication needs and lived experiences. Based on these findings, we derive a set of ethical and inclusive design recommendations for robot-mediated wellbeing assessment. By foregrounding these considerations and recommendations, this work contributes design guidance for inclusive robot-mediated wellbeing assessments for children with diverse communication needs.

cs.RO↗

Social Robotics for Disabled Students: An Empirical Investigation of Embodiment, Roles and Interaction

Institutional and social barriers in higher education often prevent students with disabilities from effectively accessing support, including lengthy procedures, insufficient information, and high social-emotional demands. This study empirically explores how disabled students perceive robot-based support, comparing two interaction roles, one information based (signposting) and one disclosure based (sounding board), and two embodiment types (physical robot/disembodied voice agent). Participants assessed these systems across five dimensions: perceived understanding, social energy demands, information access/clarity, task difficulty, and data privacy concerns. The main findings of the study reveal that the physical robot was perceived as more understanding than the voice-only agent, with embodiment significantly shaping perceptions of sociability, animacy, and privacy. We also analyse differences between disability types. These results provide critical insights into the potential of social robots to mitigate accessibility barriers in higher education, while highlighting ethical, social and technical challenges.

cs.HC↗

Stakeholder Perspectives on Whether and How Social Robots Can Support Mediation and Advocacy for Higher Education Students with Disabilities

This paper presents an iterative, participatory, empirical study that examines the potential of using artificial intelligence, such as social robots and large language models, to support mediation and advocacy for students with disabilities in higher education. Drawing on qualitative data from interviews and focus groups conducted with various stakeholders, including disabled students, disabled student representatives, and disability practitioners at the University of Cambridge, this study reports findings relating to understanding the problem space, ideating robotic support and participatory co-design of advocacy support robots. The findings highlight the potential of these technologies in providing signposting and acting as a sounding board or study companion, while also addressing limitations in empathic understanding, trust, equity, and accessibility. We discuss ethical considerations, including intersectional biases, the double empathy problem, and the implications of deploying social robots in contexts shaped by structural inequalities. Finally, we offer a set of recommendations and suggestions for future research, rethinking the notion of corrective technological interventions to tools that empower and amplify self-advocacy.

cs.HC↗