SynthesisFrontiers in robotics and AI2025
Conventions and research challenges in considering trust with socially assistive robots for older adults.
Synthesis in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reframing Person-Centered Fundamental Care in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Posthumanization: A Theory-Informed Narrative Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The global ageing population rise creates a growing need for assistance and Socially Assistive robots (SARs) have the potential to support independence for older adults. However, to allow older adults to benefit from robots that will assist in daily life, it is important to better understand the role of trust in SARs. Method: We present a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) aiming to identify the models, methods, and research settings used for measuring trust in SARs with older adults as population and analyse current factors in trust assessment. Result: Our results reveal that previous studies were mostly conducted in lab settings and used subjective self-report measures like questionnaires, interviews, and surveys to measure the trust of older adults in SARs. Moreover, many of these studies focus on healthy older adults without age-related disabilities. We also examine different human-robot trust models that influence trust, and we discuss the lack of standardisation in the measurement of trust among older people in SARs. Discussion: To address the standardisation gap, we developed a conceptual framework, Subjective Objective Trust Assessment HRI (SOTA-HRI), that incorporates subjective and objective measures to comprehensively evaluate trust in human-robot inter-actions. By combining these dimensions, our proposed framework provides a foundation for future research to design tailored interventions, enhance interaction quality, and ensure reliable trust assessment methods in this domain. Finally, we highlight key areas for future research, such as considering demographic sensitivity in trust-building strategies and further exploring contextual factors such as predictability and dependability that have not been thoroughly explored.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.