現代生活裡，許多的機器人以各種形式存在我們的周遭，並結合智慧科技導入教育、娛樂、醫療領域上，使人們擁有更優質的生活品質。而隨著檢測技術的進步，越來越多的自閉症患者出現在我們的生活裡，由於他們缺乏社會互動能力，導致他們無法自然地融入社會；目前的研究逐漸納入科技的應用來幫助其學習必要之社交技巧。相關文獻分析顯示運用機器人確實能達到良好成效。
本研究目的在探討不同擬人程度之機器人外型和動作，對自閉症兒童與機器人的互動和教學是否造成影響。期望本研究之成果能協助相關業者設計出具有成效且製作成品合理的機器人，以提高機器人技術應用在自閉症兒童的教具設計。
本研究開發兩隻不同之機器人作為實驗工具，兩者差異在於外形和動作上的擬人程度。本實驗一共邀請五位自閉症兒童參與這項實驗，實驗以一對一的方式讓自閉症兒童與機器人互動，藉由四個階段漸進式的教育情境互動內容，誘導自閉症兒童與機器人互動，進而幫助自閉症兒童從互動過程中學習社交技巧。
實驗過程透過錄影方式來做紀錄，並將影片以每一秒為單位，觀察並分析兒童在眼神注視、社會性行為、對話內容以及學習任務完成度這四項上的表現。並加這些資料透過統計分析和質性紀錄來觀察兒童對於不同擬人程度之機器人的互動程度差別。
本研究結果顯示機器人可提升自閉症兒童在社交互動上的學習。擬人程度較高之機器人，能誘導自閉症兒童產生較明顯的社會互動，而這對於自閉症兒童所缺乏之社會互動能力，是一個良好的誘發媒介。透過與機器人的互動學習，提升社會互動能力，並強化學習效果。根據本研究結果，可提出機器人應用在自閉症兒童的教育應用。

In today’s modern life, the combination of robots with intelligent technologies in the fields of education and medical fields has improved a better quality in human life. The relevant literature and analyses show that the application of robots can indeed achieve good results. Due to their lack of social interaction capabilities, they are unable to naturally integrate into society. Therefore, this study explores the effects of applying humanoid robots to assisting and inducing children with autism in social interaction and education. This study aims to assist the industry in designing robots with good effects and at reasonable prices in order to improve the technology application of robots in the design of teaching tools for autistic children.
This study developed two different anthropomorphism of robots as experimental tools, and the types of humanoid robot is belong to left side of “Uncanny valley” by Mori. Five children with autism participated in this study. Participants were asked to interact with each robot through four gradually advancing stages of interaction. The experiment was recorded by video recording, and their interaction with robots were observed and analyzed their performances of task completion level for the learning content, eyes gazing, social behaviors and conversation content. Results of this study show that higher degree of anthropomorphism can induce children more obvious social interaction. And a humanoid robot serve as a good learning companion to engage children with autism in learning environments. Using the robot in the social learning can not only raise the children social interaction capabilities, but also strength the effect of learning. According to the results of this study, humanoid robots can be applied in the education of children with autism.

1. American Psychiatric Association (Ed.). (2000). diagnostic criteria from dsM-iV-tr. Amer Psychiatric Pub Incorporated.
2. Autism Society of America Foundation，2007
3. Bar, M., Neta, M., & Linz, H. (2006). Very first impressions. Emotion, 6(2), 269.
4. Beer, R. D. (1997). The dynamics of adaptive behavior: A research program.Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 20(2), 257-289.
5. Beer, R. D., Chiel, H. J., & Drushel, R. F. (1999). Using autonomous robotics to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42(6), 85-92.
6. Breazeal, C., Brooks, A., Chilongo, D., Gray, J., Hoffman, G., Kidd, C., ... & Lockerd, A. (2004, November). Working collaboratively with humanoid robots. InHumanoid Robots, 2004 4th IEEE/RAS International Conference on (Vol. 1, pp. 253-272). IEEE.
7. Brewer, J. A., & Kieff, J. (1996). Fostering mutual respect for play at home and school. Childhood Education, 73(2), 92-96.
8. Bruner, J. S. (1975). From communication to language—A psychological perspective. Cognition, 3(3), 255-287.
9. Dautenhahn, K. (2000). Design issues on interactive environments for children with autism. In In: Procs of ICDVRAT 2000, the 3rd Int Conf on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies. University of Reading
10. Dautenhahn, K., & Werry, I. (2000). Issues of robot-human interaction dynamics in the rehabilitation of children with autism. Proc. From animals to animats, 6, 519-528.
11. Dautenhahn, K., & Werry, I. (2002). A quantitative technique for analysing robot-human interactions. In Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on (Vol. 2, pp. 1132-1138). IEEE.
12. Dautenhahn, K., Nehaniv, C. L., Walters, M. L., Robins, B., Kose-Bagci, H., Mirza, N. A., & Blow, M. (2009). KASPAR–a minimally expressive humanoid robot for human–robot interaction research. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics,6(3-4), 369-397.
13. Dautenhahn, Kerstin, and Iain Werry. "Towards interactive robots in autism therapy: Background, motivation and challenges." Pragmatics & Cognition 12.1 (2004): 1-35.
14. Duquette, A., Mercier, H., & Michaud, F. (2006, September). Investigating the use of a mobile robotic toy as an imitation agent for children with autism. InProceedings International Conference on Epigenetic Robotics: Modeling Cognitive Development in Robotic Systems, Paris, France.
15. Duquette, A., Michaud, F., & Mercier, H. (2008). Exploring the use of a mobile robot as an imitation agent with children with low-functioning autism.Autonomous Robots, 24(2), 147-157.
16. Duquette, A., Michaud, F., & Mercier, H. (2008). Exploring the use of a mobile robot as an imitation agent with children with low-functioning autism.Autonomous Robots, 24(2), 147-157.
17. Duquette, A., Michaud, F., & Mercier, H. (2008). Exploring the use of a mobile robot as an imitation agent with children with low-functioning autism.Autonomous Robots, 24(2), 147-157.
18. Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and autonomous systems, 42(3), 143-166.
19. Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and autonomous systems, 42(3), 143-166.
20. Francois, D., Powell, S., & Dautenhahn, K. (2009). A long-term study of children with autism playing with a robotic pet: Taking inspirations from non-directive play therapy to encourage children's proactivity and initiative-taking.Interaction Studies, 10(3), 324-373.
21. Hegel, F. (2013, February). A Modular Interface Design to Indicate a Robot’s Social Capabilities. In ACHI 2013, The Sixth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (pp. 426-432).
22. Hegel, F., Muhl, C., Wrede, B., Hielscher-Fastabend, M., & Sagerer, G. (2009, February). Understanding social robots. In Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, 2009. ACHI'09. Second International Conferences on (pp. 169-174). IEEE.
23. Hyun, E., Yoon, H., & Son, S. (2010, March). Relationships between user experiences and children's perceptions of the education robot. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction (pp. 199-200). IEEE Press.
24. Kanda, T., Hirano, T., Eaton, D., & Ishiguro, H. (2004). Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: A field trial. Human-Computer Interaction, 19(1), 61-84.
25. Kanda, T., Sato, R., Saiwaki, N., & Ishiguro, H. (2007). A two-month field trial in an elementary school for long-term human–robot interaction. Robotics, IEEE Transactions on, 23(5), 962-971.
26. King, W. J., & Ohya, J. (1996, April). The representation of agents: Anthropomorphism, agency, and intelligence. In Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 289-290). ACM.
27. Koegel, R. L., Koegel, L., & Carter, C. M. (1999). Pivotal teaching interactions for children with autism. School Psychology Review, 28(4), 576-594.
28. Kozima, H., & Nakagawa, C. (2006). Interactive robots as facilitators of children’s social development. Mobile robots: Toward new applications, 269-286.
29. Kozima, H., Michalowski, M. P., & Nakagawa, C. (2009). Keepon. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 3-18.
30. Kozima, H., Nakagawa, C., & Yasuda, Y. (2005, August). Interactive robots for communication-care: A case-study in autism therapy. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005. ROMAN 2005. IEEE International Workshop on (pp. 341-346). IEEE.
31. Kozima, H., Nakagawa, C., & Yasuda, Y. (2007). Children–robot interaction: a pilot study in autism therapy. Progress in Brain Research, 164, 385-400.
32. Kruijff-Korbayova, I., Cuayahuitl, H., Kiefer, B., Schroder, M., Cosi, P., Paci, G., ... & Verhelst, W. (2012). Spoken language processing in a conversational system for child-robot interaction. In Workshop on Child-Computer Interaction (WOCCI), Portland, OR, USA.
33. Leite, I., Martinho, C., Pereira, A., & Paiva, A. (2009, September). As Time goes by: Long-term evaluation of social presence in robotic companions. InRobot and Human Interactive Communication, 2009. RO-MAN 2009. The 18th IEEE International Symposium on (pp. 669-674). IEEE.
34. MacDorman, Karl F. "Subjective ratings of robot video clips for human likeness, familiarity, and eeriness: An exploration of the uncanny valley." ICCS/CogSci-2006 long symposium: Toward social mechanisms of android science. 2006.
35. Marti, P., Giusti, L., Pollini, A., & Rullo, A. (2005, October). Experiencing the flow: design issues in human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 2005 joint conference on Smart objects and ambient intelligence: innovative context-aware services: usages and technologies (pp. 69-74). ACM.
36. Mitnik, R., Recabarren, M., Nussbaum, M., & Soto, A. (2009). Collaborative robotic instruction: A graph teaching experience. Computers & Education,53(2), 330-342.
37. Mori, Masahiro. "The uncanny valley." Energy 7.4 (1970): 33-35.
38. Mundy, P., & Rebecca Neal, A. (2000). Neural plasticity, joint attention, and a transactional social-orienting model of autism. International review of research in mental retardation, 23, 139-168.
39. Nalin, M., Baroni, I., Kruijff-Korbayova, I., Canamero, L., Lewis, M., Beck, A., ... & Sanna, A. (2012, September). Children's adaptation in multi-session interaction with a humanoid robot. In RO-MAN, 2012 IEEE (pp. 351-357). IEEE.
40. Patrizia, M., Claudio, M., Leonardo, G., & Alessandro, P. (2009, June). A robotic toy for children with special needs: From requirements to design. InRehabilitation Robotics, 2009. ICORR 2009. IEEE International Conference on(pp. 918-923). IEEE.
41. Pierno, A. C., Mari, M., Lusher, D., & Castiello, U. (2008). Robotic movement elicits visuomotor priming in children with autism. Neuropsychologia, 46(2), 448-454.
42. Rapin, I., & Tuchman, R. F. (2008). Autism: definition, neurobiology, screening, diagnosis. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 55(5), 1129-1146.
43. Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., & Dickerson, P. (2009, February). From isolation to communication: a case study evaluation of robot assisted play for children with autism with a minimally expressive humanoid robot. In Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, 2009. ACHI'09. Second International Conferences on (pp. 205-211). IEEE.
44. Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., Te Boekhorst, R., & Billard, A. (2004). Effects of repeated exposure to a humanoid robot on children with autism. In Designing a More Inclusive World (pp. 225-236). Springer London.
45. S. Weir, R. Emanuel, Using LOGO to catalyse communication in an autistic child. Technical Report DAI Research Report No. 15, University of Edinburgh, 1976.
46. Scassellati, Brian, Henny Admoni, and Maja Mataric. "Robots for use in autism research." Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering 14 (2012): 275-294.
47. Shamsuddin, S., Yussof, H., Ismail, L., Hanapiah, F. A., Mohamed, S., Piah, H. A., & Zahari, N. I. (2012, March). Initial response of autistic children in human-robot interaction therapy with humanoid robot NAO. In Signal Processing and its Applications (CSPA), 2012 IEEE 8th International Colloquium on (pp. 188-193). IEEE.
48. Siciliano, B., & Khatib, O. (Eds.). (2008). Springer handbook of robotics. Springer.
49. Stichter, J. P., Randolph, J., Gage, N., & Schmidt, C. (2007). A review of recommended social competency programs for students with autism spectrum disorders. Exceptionality, 15(4), 219-232.
50. Tanaka, F., Cicourel, A., & Movellan, J. R. (2007). Socialization between toddlers and robots at an early childhood education center. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(46), 17954-17958.
51. Tizard, B., Philips, J., & Plewis, I. (1976). PLAY IN PRE‐SCHOOL CENTRES–I. PLAY MEASURES AND THEIR RELATION TO AGE. SEX AND IQ. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(4), 251-264.
52. Trevarthen, C. (1979). Communication and cooperation in early infancy: A description of primary intersubjectivity. Before speech: The beginning of interpersonal communication, 321-347.
53. Weibel, D., Stricker, D., Wissmath, B., & Mast, F. W. (2010). How socially relevant visual characteristics of avatars influence impression formation. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22(1), 37.
54. Werry, I., Dautenhahn, K., & Harwin, W. (2001). Evaluating the response of children with autism to a robot. In Procs RESNA 2001 Annual Conf. RESNA Press.
55. World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning disability and health (ICF).
56. World Health Organization. (2004). ICD-10: International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. World Health Organization.
57. 內政部統計年報，2010
58. 董芳武（2013）。兒童對人形機器人之感知與評價研究。設計學報，18（3），23-39。
59. 董芳武，2005，社會化介面於數位學習玩具之設計研究，時尚年代『The Era of Fashion』國際設計研討會，台北