Pesquisa em Serviços Transformativos e o papel dos robôs de serviço: uma análise bibliométrica

Barbosa, Priscila Pasti; Ferreira, Felipe Facco Mendes; Cesário, Larissa Cayla; Mendes, Glauco Henrique de Souza

doi:10.1590/1806-9649-2024v31e11624

THEMATIC SECTION: DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION, INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT 4.0 • Gest. Prod. 31 • 2024 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9649-2024v31e11624 linkcopiar

Pesquisa em Serviços Transformativos e o papel dos robôs de serviço: uma análise bibliométrica

Autoria SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Resumo

Resumo Pesquisa em Serviços Transformativos com Robôs (RTSR) é um campo interdisciplinar que expande os princípios da pesquisa em Serviços Transformativos (TSR) ao integrar robôs de serviço em contextos voltados para a promoção do bem-estar e a redução de vulnerabilidades. Apesar de sua relevância, a literatura sobre RTSR permanece fragmentada em áreas como saúde, robótica e gestão de serviços, dificultando uma compreensão coesa do campo. Este estudo aborda essa lacuna por meio de uma revisão sistemática e uma análise bibliométrica de RTSR, identificando tendências temáticas, lacunas de pesquisa e direções futuras. O objetivo central é mapear a estrutura intelectual do RTSR utilizando acoplamento bibliográfico, que agrupou 152 artigos em seis clusters temáticos. Os dados foram coletados nas bases acadêmicas e analisados por meio de mapeamento de redes. Os principais achados destacam o uso de robôs no cuidado de idosos para mitigar a solidão e melhorar o bem-estar emocional. O estudo enfatiza a necessidade de ensaios clínicos longitudinais em larga escala para validar a eficácia dos robôs no tratamento de condições crônicas, como demência. A sensibilidade cultural e a personalização dos robôs também se mostraram fatores essenciais para aumentar a aceitação pelos usuários e a escalabilidade, especialmente em ambientes de saúde diversos. Questões éticas, como a dependência emocional decorrente da interação prolongada com robôs, também são discutidas, especialmente em cuidados de longa duração, onde os robôs atuam como companheiros emocionais. Este artigo propõe uma agenda de pesquisa focada na integração interdisciplinar e no desenvolvimento de competência cultural para ampliar o uso dos robôs de serviço. A análise da literatura sobre RTSR identifica desafios-chave e traça caminhos para avançar na aplicação desses robôs em diferentes setores.

Palavras-chave:
Robôs de serviço; Pesquisa em Serviços Transformativos Robóticos; Bem-estar; Vulnerabilidade

Document	Title	Periodical	Quote
Sparrow & Sparrow (2006)	In the hands of machines? The future of aged care	Minds and Machines	396
Kachouie et al. (2014)	Socially Assistive Robots in Elderly Care: A Mixed-Method Systematic Literature Review	International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction	243
Pu et al. (2019)	The Effectiveness of Social Robots for Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies	The Gerontologist	218
Lu et al. (2020)	Service robots, customers, and service employees: what can we learn from the academic literature and where are the gaps?	Journal of Service Theory and Practice	201
Louie et al. (2014)	Acceptance and attitudes toward a human-like socially assistive robot by older adults	Assistive Technology	106
Odekerken-Schröder et al. (2020)	Mitigating loneliness with companion robots in the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: an integrative framework and research agenda	Journal of Service Management	96
Sriram et al. (2019)	Informal carers' experience of assistive technology use in dementia care at home: a systematic review	BMC Geriatrics	94
Góngora Alonso et al. (2019)	Social Robots for People with Aging and Dementia: A Systematic Review of Literature	Telemedicine and e-Health	93
De Graaf (2016)	An Ethical Evaluation of Human–Robot Relationships	International Journal of Social Robotics	92
Henkel et al. (2020)	Robotic transformative service research: deploying social robots for consumer well-being during COVID-19 and beyond	Journal of Service Management	86

Cluster	Document	Title	Citation	Link Strength
1	Pu et al. (2019)	The Effectiveness of Social Robots for Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies	224	24
1	Henkel et al. (2020)	Robotic transformative service research: deploying social robots for consumer well-being during COVID-19 and beyond	96	21
1	Kachouie et al. (2014)	Socially assistive robots in elderly care: a mixed-method systematic literature review.	249	19
2	Robinson et al. (2019)	Psychosocial health interventions by social robots: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials	60	22
2	Papadopoulos et al. (2022)	The CARESSES Randomized Controlled Trial: Exploring the Health-Related Impact of Culturally Competent Artificial Intelligence Embedded into Socially Assistive Robots and Tested in Older Adult Care Homes	31	9
2	Papadopoulos et al. (2020)	The CARESSES study protocol: Testing and evaluating culturally competent socially assistive robots among older adults residing in long term care homes through a controlled experimental trial	28	8
3	Demange et al. (2018)	Improving well-being in patients with major neurodegenerative disorders: Differential efficacy of brief social robot-based intervention for 3 neuropsychiatric profiles	20	17
3	Góngora Alonso et al. (2019)	Social Robots for People with Aging and Dementia: A Systematic Review of Literature	105	13
3	Asgharian et al. (2022)	A Review on the Use of Mobile Service Robots in Elderly Care	9	11
4	Abbott et al. (2019)	How do “robopets” impact the health and well-being of residents in care homes? A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative evidence	70	28
4	Pike et al. (2021)	Robot companion cats for people at home with dementia: A qualitative case study on companies	15	20
4	Bradwell et al. (2021)	Design recommendations for socially assistive robots for health and social care based on a large-scale analysis of stakeholder positions social robot design recommendations	12	15
5	Koutentakis et al. (2020)	Designing socially assistive robots for Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia patients and their caregivers: Where we are and where we are headed	20	13
5	Latikka et al. (2021)	Older Adults' Loneliness, Social Isolation, and Physical Information and Communication Technology in the Era of Ambient Assisted Living: A Systematic Literature Review	31	10
5	Gasteiger et al. (2021)	Friends from the future: A scoping review of research into robots and computer agents to combat loneliness in older people	34	9
6	Pérula-Martínez et al. (2019)	Bioinspired decision-making for a socially interactive robot	10	7
6	Santhanaraj & Mm (2021)	A survey of assistive robots and systems for elderly care	5	7
6	De Graaf (2016)	An Ethical Evaluation of Human-Robot Relationships	99	6

Focus Area	Related Cluster(s)	Identified Gaps	Suggestions for Future Research	Research Questions
Scalability and Cultural Acceptance	Clusters 1, 2, and 5	High costs and resistance among elderly users limit large-scale adoption.	Develop modular and flexible robotic platforms adaptable to various contexts without loss of functionality.	- How can modular platforms be designed for seamless adaptation across different contexts?
Scalability and Cultural Acceptance	Clusters 1, 2, and 5		Explore psychological and cultural factors affecting user acceptance.	- What cultural barriers influence the acceptance of robots by the elderly and vulnerable populations?
Clinical Validation and Longitudinal Trials	Clusters 1, 3, and 4	Lack of robust longitudinal clinical trials to validate the effectiveness of robots, especially for chronic conditions.	Conduct longitudinal trials focusing on emotional well-being, social interaction, and adherence to healthcare treatments.	- What are the long-term effects of service robots on emotional well-being and social interaction?
				- How effective are robots in helping patients adhere to long-term treatments?
			Assess robots' role in preventive care and mental health support.
Preventive and Holistic Care	Cluster 5	Limited focus on preventive care and holistic well-being in robot applications.	Investigate the preventive potential of robots to reduce social isolation and prevent mental health issues before they escalate.	- How can service robots be integrated into preventive care frameworks?
Preventive and Holistic Care	Cluster 5			- What elements are essential for robots to provide holistic care across physical and emotional dimensions?
Interdisciplinary Integration	Clusters 2, 4, and 6	Fragmentation between clinical and psychosocial interventions, limiting robots' impact on user well-being.	Develop robots capable of offering integrated emotional and therapeutic support. Investigate synergies between cognitive science and interaction design to enhance robot functionality.	- How can robots simultaneously act as caregivers and social facilitators?
Interdisciplinary Integration	Clusters 2, 4, and 6			- How can cognitive science principles improve the quality of robot-user interactions?
Cultural Competence and Personalization	Cluster 6	Insufficient focus on tailoring robots to align with cultural and social norms, limiting user acceptance.	Use artificial intelligence to personalize robots according to users' cultural, emotional, and social preferences.	- How can robots be personalized to adapt to diverse cultural contexts and user preferences?
Cultural Competence and Personalization	Cluster 6			- What ethical challenges arise from personalized robotic interactions?
Ethical Autonomy and Dependency	Cluster 6	Risks of emotional dependency and diminished human interaction through robot use.	Explore the ethical implications of robot autonomy and develop guidelines to ensure safe interactions. Investigate strategies to prevent emotional dependency on robots.	- How can robots be designed to avoid creating emotional dependency among users?
Ethical Autonomy and Dependency	Cluster 6			- What ethical frameworks are needed to ensure responsible use of robots in social care?

location_on

Universidade Federal de São Carlos Departamento de Engenharia de Produção , Caixa Postal 676 , 13.565-905 São Carlos SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 16 3351 8471 - São Carlos - SP - Brazil
E-mail: gp@dep.ufscar.br

rss_feed Stay informed of issues for this journal through your RSS reader

Research Objective	Well-being	107	70.3%	Dennis (2022); Khosla & Chu (2013)
Research Objective	Vulnerability	45	29.6%	Louie et al. (2014); Prochaska et al. (2023)
Research Sector	Health	133	87.5%	Amirabdollahian et al. (2013); Betriana et al. (2022)
	Education	5	3.2%	Lemaignan et al. (2022); Smakman et al. (2022)
	Agricultural	1	0.6%	Correll et al. (2010)
	Uninformed	13	8.5%	Lestingi et al. (2022); Yan et al. (2021)
Article Type	Conceptual	17	11.1%	Dodds et al. (2022); Henkel et al. (2020)
	Review	39	25.6%	Asgharian et al. (2022); Silva et al. (2024)
	Empirical	96	63.1%	Lemaignan et al. (2022); Smakman et al. (2022)
Approach to Empirical Articles	Qualitative	84	87.5%	Asgharian et al. (2022); Silva et al. (2024)
	Qualitative-Quantitative	6	6.2%	Ejdys & Gulc (2022); Huijnen et al. (2016)
	Quantitative	6	6.2%	Proia et al. (2022); Savela et al. (2022)
Empirical Papers Time Horizon	Longitudinal	9	9.3%	Luperto et al. (2022); Melkas et al. (2020)
	Short term	78	81.2%	Amirabdollahian et al. (2013); Schneider & Bousbiat (2023)
	Uninformed	9	9.3%	Huijnen et al. (2016); Zafrani et al. (2023)
Type of Robot in Empirical Papers	Humanoid	46	47.9%	Lemaignan et al. (2022); Ribino et al. (2021)
	Non-humanoid	22	22.9%	Feng et al. (2020); Joranson et al. (2016)
	Both	6	6.2%	Bradwell et al. (2021); Kamide et al. (2015)
	Uninformed	22	22.9%	Erel et al. (2022); Manh Do et al. (2021)
Recipients of Transformative Services in Empirical Articles	Elderly	46	47.9%	Chen et al. (2021); Kim et al. (2021)
	People with disabilities or health problems	19	19.7%	Dinesen et al. (2022); Pike et al. (2021)
	Children	14	14.5%	Moerman et al. (2019; Smakman et al. (2022)
	Employees in work environments	12	12.5%	Pereira et al. (2022); Willems et al. (2022)
	University students	5	5.2%	Abendschein et al. (2022); Jeong et al. (2022)