ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2022
Novelty Knows No Boundaries: Why a Proper Investigation of Novelty Effects Within SHRI Should Begin by Addressing the Scientific Plurality of the Field.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can humanoid robots be used as a cognitive offloading tool?Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Review
- Physical embodiment and anthropomorphism of AI tutors and their role in student enjoyment and performance.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Coping with Emotional Distress via Self-Disclosure to Robots: An Intervention with Caregivers.International journal of social robotics · 2025Article
- Let's make up a story: design and evaluation of an improvisational storytelling robot to foster older adults' meaning and purpose in life.Frontiers in dementia · 2025Article
- Positive Emotional Responses to Socially Assistive Robots in People With Dementia: Pilot Study.JMIR aging · 2024Article
- The usability and feasibility validation of the social robot MINI in people with dementia and mild cognitive impairment; a study protocol.BMC psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research on psychological novelty effects within the fields of Social Robotics and Human-Robot Interaction (together: SHRI) so far has failed to gather the momentum it deserves. With the aid of exemplary descriptions of how psychological novelty is currently approached and researched across (certain main regions of) the larger scientific landscape, I argue that the treatment of novelty effects within the multidisciplinary SHRI reflects larger circumstances of fragmentation and heterogeneity in novelty research in general. I further propose that while the concept of novelty may currently function as a Boundary Object between the contributing domains of SHRI, a properly integrated, interdisciplinary concept of novelty is needed in order to capture and investigate the scope and scale of novelty effects within research on social human-robot interaction. Building on research on the New Ontological Category Hypothesis and related studies, I argue that the novelty of social robots can be understood as radical to the extent that their comprehension requires revisions of traditional core categories of being. In order to investigate the sui generis effects of such novelty, which should not be narrowly understood as mere "noise" in the data, it is paramount that the field of SHRI begin by working out a shared, integrative framework of psychological novelty and novelty effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.