Robotising Psychometrics: Validating Wellbeing Assessment Tools in Child-Robot Interactions

TL;DR

This study evaluates whether established child wellbeing instruments (SMFQ and RCADS) retain reliability and construct validity when administered through a social robot in child-robot interaction (CRI). Using a CRI-specific dataset with a Nao robot, the authors perform reliability analyses and confirmatory PCA for robot-administered and self-reported versions, finding robust reliability and largely unidimensional structures. Robot-administered SMFQ and RCADS show strong fit, with RCADS often outperforming self-reports, though several items load differently than in traditional contexts, signaling the need for CRI-tailored revisions. The work underscores the necessity of validating standardized metrics within CRI settings and proposes practical guidance for automatic robot-assisted wellbeing assessments, cognitive-load considerations, and clinician-informed co-design of scales for pediatric populations in HRI/CRI.

Abstract

The interdisciplinary nature of Child-Robot Interaction (CRI) fosters incorporating measures and methodologies from many established domains. However, when employing CRI approaches to sensitive avenues of health and wellbeing, caution is critical in adapting metrics to retain their safety standards and ensure accurate utilisation. In this work, we conducted a secondary analysis to previous empirical work, investigating the reliability and construct validity of established psychological questionnaires such as the Short Moods and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ) and three subscales (generalised anxiety, panic and low mood) of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS) within a CRI setting for the assessment of mental wellbeing. Through confirmatory principal component analysis, we have observed that these measures are reliable and valid in the context of CRI. Furthermore, our analysis revealed that scales communicated by a robot demonstrated a better fit than when self-reported, underscoring the efficiency and effectiveness of robot-mediated psychological assessments in these settings. Nevertheless, we have also observed variations in item contributions to the main factor, suggesting potential areas of examination and revision (e.g., relating to physiological changes, inactivity and cognitive demands) when used in CRI. Findings from this work highlight the importance of verifying the reliability and validity of standardised metrics and assessment tools when employed in CRI settings, thus, aiming to avoid any misinterpretations and misrepresentations.