[1] R. Aipperspach, E. Cohen, and J. Canny. Modeling human behavior
from simple sensors in the home. Pervasive Computing,
pages 337–348, 2006.
Google Scholar
[2] F. Amirabdollahian, S. Bedaf, R. Bormann, H. Draper, V. Evers,
J. G. Pérez, G. J. Gelderblom, C. G. Ruiz, D. Hewson, N. Hu, et al.
Assistive technology design and development for acceptable
robotics companions for ageing years. Paladyn, Journal of
Behavioral Robotics, 4(2):94–112, 2013.
Google Scholar
[3] Associated Press. Robot rep goes to school. Wired, June 6
2006. http://archive.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2006/
06/71078. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[4] J. Beer and L. Takayama. Mobile remote presence systems for
older adults: Acceptance, benefits, and concerns. In Proc. of
the 6th Intl. Conf. on Human-Robot Interaction, pages 19–26.
ACM, 2011.
Google Scholar
[5] E. Bergman and E. Johnson. Towards accessible humancomputer
interaction. Advances in human-computer interaction,
5(1), 1995.
Google Scholar
[6] R. Bevilacqua, A. Cesta, G. Cortellessa, A. Macchione, A. Orlandini,
and L. Tiberio. Telepresence robot at home: A long-term
case study. In Ambient Assisted Living: Italian Forum 2013,
pages 73–85. Springer International Publishing, 2014.
Google Scholar
[7] G. Carruthers. Is the body schema suflcient for the sense of
embodiment? an alternative to de Vignemont’s model. Philosophical
Psychology, 22(2):123–142, 2009.
Google Scholar
[8] J. Casper and R. Murphy. Human-robot interactions during
the robot-assisted urban search and rescue response at the
world trade center. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics, 33(3):367–385, 2003.
Google Scholar
[9] CastingWords. Audio transcription services: MP3s, video and
more... Webpage, 2014. http://castingwords.com. Accessed
Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[10] R. Chellali and K. Baizid. What maps and what displays for
remote situation awareness and ROV localization? In Human
Interface and the Management of Information. Interacting with
Information, pages 364–372. Springer, 2011.
Google Scholar
[11] J. Y. Chen, E. C. Haas, and M. J. Barnes. Human performance
issues and user interface design for teleoperated robots. IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications
and Reviews, 37(6):1231–1245, 2007.
Google Scholar
[12] R. A. Cooper. Quality-of-life technology. IEEE Engineering in
Medicine and Biology Magazine, 27(2):10, 2008.
Google Scholar
[13] S. Coradeschi, A. Loutfi, A. Kristoffersson, S. Von Rump,
A. Cesta, and G. Cortellessa. Towards a Methodology for
Longitudinal Evaluation of Social Robotic Telepresence for
Elderly. In Proc. of Human-Robot Interaction Workshop on
Social Robotic Telepresence, 2011.
Google Scholar
[14] M. Desai, K. Tsui, H. Yanco, and C. Uhlik. Essential features of
telepresence robots. In Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Technologies
for Practical Robot Applications (TePRA), 2011.
Google Scholar
[15] J. V. Draper, D. B. Kaber, and J. M. Usher. Telepresence. Human
Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society, 40(3):354–375, 1998.
Google Scholar
[16] H. Evans. Exploring robots for accessibility, in Seattle. Webpage,
May 6 2014. http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/
2014/05/exploring-robots-for-accessibility-in.html. Accessed
Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[17] D. Fels, L. Williams, G. Smith, J. Treviranus, and R. Eagleson.
Developing a Video-mediated Communication System for Hospitalized
Children. Telemedicine Journal, 5(2):193–208, 1999.
Google Scholar
[18] D. Fels, J. Waalen, S. Zhai, and P. Weiss. Telepresence Under
Exceptional Circumstances: Enriching the Connection to
School for Sick Children. Proc. of IFIP INTERACT01: Human-
Computer Interaction, pages 617–624, 2001.
Google Scholar
[19] R. Fish, R. Kraut, R. Root, and R. Rice. Evaluating video as a
technology for informal communication. In Proc. of the SIGCHI
Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 37–48.
ACM, 1992.
Google Scholar
[20] J. Fitzgerald. After Surgery, A Robot May Be at Your Side. The
Boston Globe, December 12 2011. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2011/12/12/the_robot_that_
makes_house_calls. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[21] N. Fliesler. A Roving Eye: Home Health Monitoring with
Robotic Systems. Webpage, December 26 2011. http:
//www.massdevice.com/blogs/massdevice/roving-eye-homehealth-
monitoring-with-robotic-systems. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[22] T. Fong and C. Thorpe. Vehicle teleoperation interfaces. Autonomous
Robots, 11(1):9–18, 2001.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[23] J. J. Gibson. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.
Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1979.
Google Scholar
[24] Giraff Technologies AB. giraff. Webpage, 2014. http://www.
giraff.org/?lang=en. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[25] M. Gonzalez, C. Hidalgo, and A. Barabasi. Understanding
individual human mobility patterns. Nature, 453(7196):779–
782, 2008.
Google Scholar
[26] M. Gorman. Suitable technologies introduces beam, the
remote presence device. Webpage, September 26 2012.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/26/beam-telepresencedevice-
suitable-technologies. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[27] C. M. Gridley, A. B. Retik, B. Cilento, and H. T. Nguyen. In-home
robots can effectively engage children and their parents in
post-operative care, and allow for cost-eflcient remote physician
monitoring. In American Academy of Pediatrics National
Conference and Exhibition, October 20 2012. Session abstract.
https://aap.confex.com/aap/2012/webprogram/Paper17310.
html. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[28] E. Guizzo. When My Avatar Went to Work. IEEE Spectrum,
September 22 2010. http://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/
industrial-robots/when-my-avatar-went-to-work. Accessed
Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[29] H. Haas. The influence of a single echo on the audibility of
speech. J. Audio Eng. Soc., 20(2):146–159, 1972.
Google Scholar
[30] M. Hassenzahl. User Experience and Experience Design. Webpage,
2014. http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/
user_experience_and_experience_design.html; chapter 3.
Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[31] G. J. Hole, P. A. George, K. Eaves, A. Rasek, et al. Effects
of geometric distortions on face-recognition performance.
Perception-London, 31(10):1221–1240, 2002.
Google Scholar
[32] R. Hoover. The Force is Strong with NASA’s Smartphone-
Powered Satellite, July 8 2011. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_
pages/station/main/spheres_smartphone.html. Accessed
Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[33] IBM Centres for Solution Innovation. Telbotics – PEBBLES,
2008. http://www.customerfacingsolutions.com/pdfs/work/
Telebotics%20PEBBLES.pdf. Accessed Dec. 2104.
Google Scholar
[34] W. A. IJsselsteijn, H. de Ridder, J. Freeman, and S. E. Avons.
Presence: concept, determinants, and measurement. In Electronic
Imaging, pages 520–529. International Society for Optics
and Photonics, 2000.
Google Scholar
[35] E. Kac. Live from Mars. Leonardo, 31(1):1–2, 1998. ISSN
0024-094X.
Google Scholar
[36] S. Kiesler, A. Powers, S. Fussell, and C. Torrey. Anthropomorphic
interactions with a robot and robot-like agent. Social
Cognition, 26(2):169–181, 2008.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[37] D. Kim, R. Hazlett-Knudsen, H. Culver-Godfrey, G. Rucks,
T. Cunningham, D. Portee, J. Bricout, Z. Wang, and A. Behal.
How autonomy impacts performance and satisfaction: Results
from a study with spinal cord injured subjects using an assistive
robot. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics,
Part A: Systems and Humans, 42(1):2–14, 2012.
Google Scholar
[38] K. Koffka. Principles of Gestalt psychology. Routledge, 4
edition, 2013.
Google Scholar
[39] Z. G. Kotala. Robotic Arm’s Big Flaw: Patients Say It’s ’Too
Easy’. Webpage, September 23 2010. http://today.ucf.edu/
robotic-arms-big-flaw-patients-say-its-too-easy. Accessed
Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[40] A. Kristoffersson, S. Coradeschi, K. S. Eklundh, and A. Loutfi.
Towards measuring quality of interaction in mobile robotic
telepresence using sociometric badges. Paladyn, Journal of
Behavioral Robotics, 4(1):34–48, 2013.
Google Scholar
[41] A. Kristoffersson, S. Coradeschi, and A. Loutfi. A review of
mobile robotic telepresence. Advances in Human-Computer
Interaction, 2013.
Google Scholar
[42] S. Kurniawan and P. Zaphiris. Research-derived web design
guidelines for older people. In Proceedings of the 7th international
ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility,
pages 129–135. ACM, 2005.
Google Scholar
[43] L. Lewington. Robots explore Tate Britain’s artwork after
dark. Webpage, August 12 2014. http://www.bbc.com/news/
technology-28742582. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[44] A. Lindgren-Streicher and C. Reich. Visitor experience monitoring
project: Fiscal year 2010 report. 2011.
Google Scholar
[45] M. Lombard and T. Ditton. At the heart of it all: The concept of
presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2):
0–0, 1997.
Google Scholar
[46] K. Massie. Headline classroom robots make school possible
for home-bound students. Webpage, April 5 2014. http://www.
simpsonstreetfreepress.org/science-and-technology/robotsubstitution.
Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[47] M. Micire. Evolution and field performance of a rescue robot.
Journal of Field Robotics, 25(1-2):17–30, 2008.
Google Scholar
[48] M. J. Micire. Multi-Touch Interaction for Robot Command and
Control. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts Lowell,
December 2010.
Google Scholar
[49] G. Miller and J. Licklider. The intelligibility of interrupted
speech. J. of the Acoustical Soc. of Amer., 1950.
Google Scholar
[50] M. R. Mine, F. P. Brooks Jr, and C. H. Sequin. Moving objects
in space: Exploiting proprioception in virtual-environment
interaction. In Proceedings of the 24th annual conference on
Computer graphics and interactive techniques, pages 19–26.
ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1997.
Google Scholar
[51] J. Nielsen. Usability Engineering. San Francisco, CA: Morgan
Kaufmann, 1993. ISBN 0-12-518406-9.
Google Scholar
[52] J. Nielsen. Enhancing the explanatory power of usability
heuristics. In SIGCHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing
Systems, pages 152–158, 1994.
Google Scholar
[53] J. Nielsen. 10 usability heuristics for user interface design.
Webpage, January 1 1995. http://www.nngroup.com/articles/
ten-usability-heuristics. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[54] D. Norman. How might people interact with agents. Communications
of the ACM, 37(7):68–71, 1994.
Google Scholar
[55] D. A. Norman. The design of everyday things. Basic books,
2002.
Google Scholar
[56] K. Pernice and J. Nielsen. Usability guidelines for accessible
web design. Technical report, Nielsen Norman Group, 48105
Warm Springs Blvd., Fremont, CA 94539-7498 USA, 2001. http:
//www.nngroup.com/reports/usability-guidelines-accessibleweb-
design; originally titled Beyond ALT Text: Making the Web
Easy to Use for Users with Disabilities. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[57] I. Rhee, M. Shin, S. Hong, K. Lee, S. Kim, and S. Chong. On the
Levy-walk nature of human mobility. IEEE/ACM Transactions on
Networking (TON), 19(3):630–643, 2011.
Google Scholar
[58] L. Richards. I, Student. Homebound Teen is Attending Classes
via Wheel-bound Robot. Webpage, January 19 2011. http:
//www.timesrecordnews.com/news/2011/jan/19/i-student.
Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[59] L. D. Riek. Realizing Hinokio: candidate requirements for
physical avatar systems. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE
international conference on Human-robot interaction, pages
303–308. ACM, 2007.
Google Scholar
[60] G. Riva, F. Davide, and W. A. IJsselsteijn. Being there: Concepts,
effects and measurements of user presence in synthetic
environments. Ios Press, 2003.
Google Scholar
[61] J. Rosenberg. Quality matters. United Communications magazine,
August 2010. http://www.tmcnet.com/ucmag/columns/
articles/99344-quality-matters.htm. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[62] R. Rubin, A. Rubin, E. Graham, E. Perse, and D. Seibold. Communication
Research Measures II: A Sourcebook. Routledge,
Taylor & Francis, 2009.
Google Scholar
[63] Ryerson University. PEBBLES. Webpage, 2011. http://www.
ryerson.ca/pebbles/index.html. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[64] R. Schulz, S. R. Beach, J. T. Matthews, K. L. Courtney, and
A. De Vito Dabbs. Designing and evaluating quality of life
technologies: An interdisciplinary approach. Proceedings of
the IEEE, 100(8):2397–2409, 2012.
CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[65] B. Shneiderman. Direct manipulation: A step beyond programming
languages. Sparks of Innovation in Human-Computer
Interaction, page 17, 1993.
Google Scholar
[66] D. Sirkin, G. Venolia, J. Tang, G. Robertson, T. Kim, K. Inkpen,
M. Sedlins, B. Lee, and M. Sinclair. Motion and attention
in a kinetic videoconferencing proxy. In Human-Computer
Interaction–INTERACT 2011, pages 162–180. Springer, 2011.
Google Scholar
[67] Suitable Technologies. How beam works. Webpage, 2014.
https://www.suitabletech.com/beam/#howBeamWorks. Accessed
Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[68] Suitable Technologies, Inc. Shelbot (aka Shelbot), January 9
2013. http://blog.suitabletech.com/2013/01/09/shelbot-akashel-
bot. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[69] L. Takayama. Toward making robots invisible-in-use. New
Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction, 2, 2011.
Google Scholar
[70] R. Toris and B. Alexander. The Standard ROS JavaScript Library,
June 11 2014. http://wiki.ros.org/roslibjs. Accessed Dec.
2014.
Google Scholar
[71] K. Tsui, M. Desai, H. Yanco, and C. Uhlik. Exploring use
cases for telepresence robots. In Proc. of Intl. Conf. on HRI.
ACM/IEEE, 2011.
Google Scholar
[72] K. Tsui, A. Norton, D. Brooks, H. Yanco, and D. Kontak. Designing
telepresence robot systems for use by people with special
needs. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Quality of Life Technologies 2011: Intelligent Systems for Better
Living, held in conjunction with RESNA 2011 as part of FICCDAT,
2011.
Google Scholar
[73] K. M. Tsui. Design and evaluation of a visual control interface
of a wheelchair robotic arm for users with cognitive impairments.
Master’s thesis, University of Massachusetts Lowell,
May 2008.
Google Scholar
[74] K. M. Tsui. The Development of Telepresence Robots for People
with Disabilities. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts
Lowell, April 2014.
Google Scholar
[75] K. M. Tsui and H. A. Yanco. Design challenges and guidelines
for social interaction using mobile telepresence robots. Reviews
of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 9(1):227–301, 2013.
Google Scholar
[76] K. M. Tsui, K. Abu-Zahra, R. Casipe, J. M’Sadoques, and J. L.
Drury. A Process for Developing Specialized Heuristics: Case
Study in Assistive Robotics. Technical report, University of
Massachusetts Lowell, 2009. Available at http://teaching.cs.
uml.edu/techrpts.
Google Scholar
[77] K. M. Tsui, K. Abu-Zahra, R. Casipe, J. M’Sadoques, and J. L.
Drury. Developing Heuristics for Assistive Robotics. In Proc. of
Intl. Conf. on HRI. ACM/IEEE, 2010. Late breaking paper.
Google Scholar
[78] K. M. Tsui, M. Desai, and H. Yanco. Towards Measuring the
Quality of Interaction: Communication through Telepresence
Robots. In Proc. of the Performance Metrics for Intelligent
Systems Workshop (PerMIS), 2012.
Google Scholar
[79] K. M. Tsui, K. Flynn, A. McHugh, H. A. Yanco, and D. Kontak.
Designing speech-based interfaces for telepresence robots for
people with disabilities. In IEEE International Conference on
Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), 2013.
Google Scholar
[80] K. M. Tsui, E. McCann, A. McHugh, M. Medvedev, H. A. Yanco,
D. Kontak, and J. L. Drury. Towards designing telepresence
robot navigation for people with disabilities. International
Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics, 7(3):307–
344, 2014.
Google Scholar
[81] K. M. Tsui, A. Norton, D. J. Brooks, E. McCann, M. S. Medvedev,
J. Allspaw, S. Suksawat, J. M. Dalphond, M. Lunderville, and
H. A. Yanco. Iterative design of a semi-autonomous social
telepresence robot research platform: a chronology. Intelligent
Service Robotics, 7(2):103–119, 2014.
Google Scholar
[82] K. Urrutia. Creating a CSS3 pulsating circle. Webpage, January
24 2012. http://kevinurrutia.tumblr.com/post/16411271583/
creating-a-css3-pulsating-circle. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[83] G. Vanderheiden and K. Vanderheiden. Guidelines for the
design of consumer products to increase their accessibility to
persons with disabilities or who are aging. Webpage, 1992.
http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/consumer_product_guidelines/
toc.htm; working draft v1.7. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[84] P. Vespa. Multimodality Monitoring and Telemonitoring in
Neurocritical Care: From Microdialysis to Robotic telepresence.
Current Opinion in Critical Care, 11(2):133, 2005. ISSN 1070-
5295.
Google Scholar
[85] P. Vespa, C. Miller, X. Hu, V. Nenov, F. Buxey, and N. Martin.
Intensive Care Unit Robotic Telepresence Facilitates Rapid
Physician Response to Unstable Patients and Decreased Cost
in Neurointensive Care. Surgical Neurology, 67(4):331–337,
2007. ISSN 0090-3019.
Google Scholar
[86] VGo Communications, Inc. VGo robotic telepresence for
healthcare, education and business, 2014. http://www.
vgocom.com. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[87] W3C. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Webpage,
December 11 2008. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/RECWCAG20-
20081211. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[88] W3C. User agent accessibility guidelines (UAAG) 2.0. Webpage,
November 7 2013. http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WDUAAG20-
20131107; draft. Accessed Dec. 2014.
Google Scholar
[89] J. Wineman, J. Peponis, and R. Conroy Dalton. Exploring, engaging,
understanding in museums. In Proceedings of the
Space Syntax and Spatial Cognition Workshop: Spatial Cognition
’06. Springer, 2006. Monograph Series of the Transregional
Collaborative Research Center. Universität Bremen, Bremen.
Google Scholar
[90] H. A. Yanco, H. J. Kim, F. G. Martin, and L. Silka. Artbotics:
Combining art and robotics to broaden participation in computing.
In AAAI Spring Symposium on Robots and Robot
Venues: Resources for AI Education, 2007.
Google Scholar
[91] S. Yarosh and P. Markopoulos. Design of an Instrument for the
Evaluation of Communication Technologies with Children. In
Proc. of the 9th Intl. Conf. on Interaction Design and Children,
pages 266–269. ACM, 2010.
Google Scholar
Comments (0)