Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Nov 19:8:744526.
doi: 10.3389/frobt.2021.744526. eCollection 2021.

10 Years of Human-NAO Interaction Research: A Scoping Review

Aida Amirova  1 , Nazerke Rakhymbayeva  2 , Elmira Yadollahi  3 , Anara Sandygulova  2 , Wafa Johal  4   5
Affiliations

10 Years of Human-NAO Interaction Research: A Scoping Review

Aida Amirova et al. Front Robot AI. .

Abstract

The evolving field of human-robot interaction (HRI) necessitates that we better understand how social robots operate and interact with humans. This scoping review provides an overview of about 300 research works focusing on the use of the NAO robot from 2010 to 2020. This study presents one of the most extensive and inclusive pieces of evidence on the deployment of the humanoid NAO robot and its global reach. Unlike most reviews, we provide both qualitative and quantitative results regarding how NAO is being used and what has been achieved so far. We analyzed a wide range of theoretical, empirical, and technical contributions that provide multidimensional insights, such as general trends in terms of application, the robot capabilities, its input and output modalities of communication, and the human-robot interaction experiments that featured NAO (e.g. number and roles of participants, design, and the length of interaction). Lastly, we derive from the review some research gaps in current state-of-the-art and provide suggestions for the design of the next generation of social robots.

Keywords: human-robot interaction; humanoid robot; nao; qualitative; quantitative; review; social robot; survey.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The screening process (adapted from PRISMA template 2009).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Number of publication per country.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Contributions made over the years grouped by each study type.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Application fields grouped by each study type over the years.
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Human-robot ratio per role of robot and participant, and co-occurrence of robot and participant role (right).
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
Number and age group of participants per application field.
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 7
Input data (left), output data (middle), equipment (right) for each application field.
FIGURE 8
FIGURE 8
Robot’s autonomy per year and application fields.
FIGURE 9
FIGURE 9
Experimental methodology per year (left) and application fields (right).
FIGURE 10
FIGURE 10
Timespan of the experiment per year (left) and application fields (middle) and duration of sessions in application field (right).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Adam C., Johal W., Pellier D., Fiorino H., Pesty S. (2016). “Social Human-Robot Interaction: A New Cognitive and Affective Interaction-Oriented Architecture,” in Social Robotics. Editors Agah A., Cabibihan J.-J., Howard A. M., Salichs M. A., He H. (Cham: Springer International Publishing; ), 253–263. 10.1007/978-3-319-47437-3_25 - DOI
    1. Ahmad M. I., Shahid S., Tahir A. (2017). “Towards the Applicability of NAO Robot for Children with Autism in Pakistan,” in Human-Computer Interaction - INTERACT 2017 - 16th IFIP TC 13 International Conference of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Mumbai, India, September 25–29, 2017. Editors Bernhaupt R., Dalvi G., Joshi A., Balkrishan D. K., O’Neill J., Winckler M. (Springer; ), 463–472. 10.1007/978-3-319-67687-6_32 - DOI
    1. Ajili I., Mallem M., Didier J.-Y. (2017). “Gesture Recognition for Humanoid Robot Teleoperation,” in 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (IEEE), Lisbon, Portugal, August 28–31, 2017, 1115–1120. 10.1109/roman.2017.8172443 - DOI
    1. Alenljung B., Andreasson R., Lowe R., Billing E., Lindblom J. (2018). Conveying Emotions by Touch to the Nao Robot: A User Experience Perspective. Mti 2, 82. 10.3390/mti2040082 - DOI
    1. Ali S., Mehmood F., Ayaz Y., Asgher U., Khan M. J. (2020). “Effect of Different Visual Stimuli on Joint Attention of Asd Children Using Nao Robot,” in Advances in Neuroergonomics and Cognitive Engineering. Editor Ayaz H. (Cham: Springer International Publishing; ), 490–499. 10.1007/978-3-030-20473-0_48 - DOI

Publication types