Record STMT-WA869B9Advisory

A Survey of Expectations About the Role of Robots in Robot-Assisted Therapy for Children with ASD: Ethical Acceptability, Trust, Sociability, Appearance, and Attachment

Position paper UnknownGlobaladopted

This paper presents an exploratory survey on stakeholder expectations regarding the ethical and social acceptability of using robots in therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). It examines issues of trust, appearance, and attachment, arguing that robots should operate with supervised autonomy rather than replacing human therapists. The findings suggest that zoomorphic robot designs may be less problematic than human-like appearances.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

SpringerIndustry

Publisher

De Montfort UniversityAcademic

Lead issuer

Legal forceAdvisory

Under whose authorityUnknown

Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Researchers and academicsGeneral publicProfessional groupChildren and young people

Researchers, developers, and healthcare professionals interested in the ethics and practical implementation of assistive robotics in therapy.

Sectors

Healthcare · robot-assisted therapy for children with ASDResearch and science

What the document contains

What's covered

The document addresses ethical, social, and therapeutic concerns regarding the use of social robots in therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder, incorporating survey results from relevant stakeholders regarding trust, appearance, and robot autonomy.

What's missing

It does not contain legal regulations, binding policy obligations, or formal enforcement mechanisms for AI and robotics development.

Key takeaways

Stakeholders generally approve of using robots in therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder.
Robots should not replace human therapists; instead, they should be designed with supervised autonomy.
Zoomorphic robot appearances may be less problematic than human-like appearances.
Involving stakeholders in research ensures technology is responsive to community concerns.

Principles it states

Responsible research and innovation in roboticsSupervised autonomy for therapeutic robots

Outline

· Abstract
· Introduction
· Ethical, Social and Therapeutic Concerns
· Survey Methodology and Results
· Discussion and Conclusion

Issued17 April 2015

Length2,395 words

FormatNot recorded

Scopeglobal

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Accountability

0/5

Clear responsibility for AI outcomes

N/A

screening score · 2026-10-24

Fairness

0/5

Non-discrimination and equitable treatment

N/A

screening score · 2026-10-24

Human Dignity

0/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

N/A

screening score · 2026-10-24

Human Oversight

3/5

Humans remain in control of consequential decisions

We conclude that although in general stakeholders approve of using robots in therapy for children with ASD, it is wise to avoid replacing therapists by robots and to develop and use robots that have what we call supervised autonomy.

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Privacy

0/5

Protection of personal data and private life

N/A

screening score · 2026-10-24

Transparency

0/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

N/A

screening score · 2026-10-24

Enforcement

0/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

N/A

screening score · 2026-10-24

Impact Assessment

0/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

N/A

screening score · 2026-10-24

Topics

Physical AI Governancesupporting

robot_assisted_therapy autism_spectrum_disorder roboethics human_robot_interaction supervised_autonomy