PDF(1583 KB)
PDF(1583 KB)
PDF(1583 KB)
鼓励、阻抑与共进：老年人居家使用陪伴机器人的内层社会支持
Encouragement, Discouragement and Co-progression: Inner Social Support for Home Use of Companion Robots by Aging People
高龄少子化国情下，以陪伴机器人为代表的智慧养老产品与服务正走进我国家庭。想要陪伴机器人更好地服务老人，来自家人的内层社会支持十分重要。通过9个月的参与式观察与四阶段深度访谈，研究发现，我国老年人使用陪伴机器人获得的来自子孙、配偶的内层社会支持主要体现为工具支持、信息支持和情感支持。其中代际支持呈现出“不支持—有限支持—适度支持—过度支持”的动态、交织过程；老年人也会对子孙代使用机器人提供反向支持；配偶支持以情感支持为主，男性老年人较少支持女性伴侣使用陪伴机器人，而女性老年人更依赖配偶的支持；作为“他者”的陪伴机器人在家庭中更像是一个联结老年人社会关系的中介，而非人机传播中的陪伴者。
Under the national situation of aging and childlessness, intelligent elderly care products and services represented by companion robots are coming into families. For companion robots to better serve the elderly, inner social support from the family is important. Through 9-month participant observation and 4-stage in-depth interviews, the study found that the inner social support from children, grandchildren, and spouses in the family that aging people get from using companion robots is mainly reflected in instrumental, informational, and emotional support. Intergenerational support shows a dynamic and intertwined process of “nonsupport-limited support-moderate support-excessive support”. Aging people also generate reverse support for their children and grandchildren. Spousal support is predominantly emotional, and male older adults are less likely to support their female partners, while female older adults are more dependent on spousal support. The companion robot is more of a mediator in the family that connects aging people than a companion in human-robot communication.
Social support / aging people / companion robot / human machine communication
| [1] |
陈友华, 宗昊(2023). 数字反哺:年长世代的“精神接入”何以可能?. 《西安交通大学学报(社会科学版).(3),98-109.
|
| [2] |
杜鹏, 孙鹃娟, 张文娟, 王雪辉(2016). 中国老年人的养老需求及家庭和社会养老资源现状——基于2014年中国老年社会追踪调查的分析. 《人口研究》,(6),49-61.
|
| [3] |
国务院新闻办公室(2021年5月11日). 国新办举行第七次全国人口普查主要数据结果发布会. http://www.scio.gov.cn/xwfb/gwyxwbgsxwfbh/wqfbh_2284/2021n_2711/2021n05y11r/.
|
| [4] |
贺建平, 黄肖肖(2020). 城市老年人的智能手机使用与实现幸福感:基于代际支持理论和技术接受模型. 《国际新闻界》,(3),49-73.
|
| [5] |
侯娟, 潘学飞, 马美静, 兰菁, 琚晓燕, 方晓义(2019). 新生婴儿父母养育压力对婚姻质量的影响:配偶支持的中介作用. 《心理与行为研究》,(1),97-106.
|
| [6] |
胡湛, 彭希哲, 吴玉韶(2022). 积极应对人口老龄化的“中国方案”. 《中国社会科学》(9),46-66+205.
|
| [7] |
李思悦, 雷思涵, 佘成雨, 魏润南(2023). 朋辈亦可亲:数字鸿沟中社会支持对老年人主观幸福感的影响. 《国际新闻界》,(11),81-104.
|
| [8] |
马尔科·内斯科乌(2016/2021). 器人:界限、潜力和挑战》 (柳帅,张英飒译)(第1版). 北京大学出版社.
|
| [9] |
彭兰(2022). 人机传播与交流的未来. 《湖南师范大学社会科学学报》,(5),12-22.
|
| [10] |
彭希哲, 王雪辉(2021). 家庭结构、个人禀赋与养老方式选择——基于队列视角的分析. 《人口学刊》,(1),64-77.
|
| [11] |
亓昕, 郝彩虹(2010). 性别视角下的高龄老人社会支持状况研究. 《人口与经济》,(4),78-82.
|
| [12] |
申琦, 关心怡(2024). 陪伴机器人与智慧养老:基于动态使用过程的实验观察. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(9),66-75.
|
| [13] |
申琦, 刘一然(2024). 数字反哺还是互哺:老年人社交机器人采纳与使用的家庭实践. 《新闻与写作》,(8),19-30.
|
| [14] |
申琦, 邵一鸣(2021). 机器人走进生活:老年人对社交机器人的外观刻板印象与风险感知. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(10),156-162.
|
| [15] |
申琦, 王璐瑜(2021). 当“机器人”成为社会行动者:人机交互关系中的刻板印象. 《新闻与传播研究》,(2),37-52+127.
|
| [16] |
孙向晨(2024). 何以归家:现代性的救赎. 《学术月刊》,(3),20-36.
|
| [17] |
王大华, 张明妍(2011). 老年人配偶支持的特点及其与夫妻依恋、婚姻满意度的关系. 《心理发展与教育》,(2),195-201.
|
| [18] |
王金玲(2009). 家庭权力的性别格局:不平等还是多维度网状分布?. 《华中科技大学学报(社会科学版)》,(2),62-68+81.
|
| [19] |
王玲凤, 施跃健(2008). 城市空巢老人的社会支持及其与心理健康状况的关系. 《中国心理卫生杂志》,(2),118-122.
|
| [20] |
王萍, 李树茁(2011). 代际支持对农村老年人生活满意度影响的纵向分析. 《人口研究》,(1),44-52.
|
| [21] |
王胜今, 董鸿女(2024). 互联网使用对老年人健康的影响研究——基于性别差异和代际支持的视角. 《人口学刊》,(2),77-92.
|
| [22] |
王伟, 王兴超, 雷雳, 付晓洁(2017). 移动社交媒介使用行为对青少年友谊质量的影响:网络自我表露和网络社会支持的中介作用. 《心理科学》,(4),870-877.
|
| [23] |
吴玉韶(2023). 把握基本养老服务体系建设的重大利好. 《中国社会工作》,(17),19.
|
| [24] |
雪莉·特克尔(2011/2014). 《群体性孤独:为什么我们对科技期待更多,对彼此却不能更亲密?》(周逵,刘菁荆译)(第1版). 浙江人民出版社.
|
| [25] |
谢兴政, 张大伟(2024). 从关系差序到知识差序:农村中老年人数字反哺研究——基于科学信息传播的考察. 《编辑之友》,(4),48-55.
|
| [26] |
阎云翔, 杨雯琦(2017). 社会自我主义:中国式亲密关系——中国北方农村的代际亲密关系与下行式家庭主义. 《探索与争鸣》,(7),4-15+1.
|
| [27] |
喻国明, 韩婷(2020). 用户媒介使用宽度的性别沟及其演进规律——基于生命阶段与代际演进的研究视角. 《社会科学战线》,(9),158-166.
|
| [28] |
赵红艳, 吴燕(2023). 轨迹、重构与区隔:生命历程视角下老年群体数字分化. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(5),159-168.
|
| [29] |
赵晓航, 李建新(2019). 丧偶对老年人孤独感的影响:基于家庭支持的视角. 《人口学刊》,(6),30-43.
|
| [30] |
周林刚, 冯建华(2005). 社会支持理论——一个文献的回顾. 《广西师范学院学报》,(3),11-14+20.
|
| [31] |
周裕琼, 丁海琼(2020). 中国家庭三代数字反哺现状及影响因素研究. 《国际新闻界》,(3),6-31.
|
| [32] |
周裕琼, 谢奋, 龚宝发(2023). 家庭祖孙三代的老化态度及影响因素研究——基于老龄化传播视角的初次尝试. 《广州大学学报(社会科学版)》,(1),160-171.
|
| [33] |
Social support is defined as information leading the subject to believe that he is cared for and loved, esteemed, and a member of a network of mutual obligations. The evidence that supportive interactions among people are protective against the health consequences of life stress is reviewed. It appears that social support can protect people in crisis from a wide variety of pathological states: from low birth weight to death, from arthritis through tuberculosis to depression, alcoholism, and the social breakdown syndrome. Furthermore, social support may reduce the amount of medication required, accelerate recovery, and facilitate compliance with prescribed medical regimens.
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
Robotic devices for older adults are becoming a reality. New robots are being introduced for the growing subpopulation of healthy older adults, with an emphasis on supporting the positive aspects of aging. In order to inform the design and implementation of such robots, the relevant needs and concerns of this population should be studied, mapped, and translated into recommendations. We present a qualitative study of thirty cognitively-intact older adults, evaluating their attitudes and emotional reactions towards different types of home robotic devices. Interview analysis of participants reactions to videos of six devices uncovered four user needs that can be threatened by the introduction of home robots: the need for independence, the need for control, the fear of being replaced, and the need for authenticity. Furthermore, results reveal that cognitively-intact older adults are willing to adopt robotic devices into their homes, contingent upon their preferences and concerns being addressed. We provide recommendations regarding how researchers and designers of home robots can better address the user needs of healthy older adults by leveraging aspects of the robot's function, speech, appearance, size, proactivity, and mobility.
|
| [36] |
\n Social robots are currently a form of assistive technology for the elderly, healthy, or with cognitive impairment, helping to maintain their independence and improve their well-being.\n
|
| [37] |
Artificial intelligence (AI) and people’s interactions with it—through virtual agents, socialbots, and language-generation software—do not fit neatly into paradigms of communication theory that have long focused on human–human communication. To address this disconnect between communication theory and emerging technology, this article provides a starting point for articulating the differences between communicative AI and previous technologies and introduces a theoretical basis for navigating these conditions in the form of scholarship within human–machine communication (HMC). Drawing on an HMC framework, we outline a research agenda built around three key aspects of communicative AI technologies: (1) the functional dimensions through which people make sense of these devices and applications as communicators, (2) the relational dynamics through which people associate with these technologies and, in turn, relate to themselves and others, and (3) the metaphysical implications called up by blurring ontological boundaries surrounding what constitutes human, machine, and communication.
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
Current literature on social support identifies social structure as a source of distress. However, past efforts tend to operationalize structure in terms of demographic characteristics. The present paper argues that structure should be conceived of as participation and involvement in community and social relations. Structure may include community ties, social networks and intimate ties. We hypothesize that the three elements represent the outer layer (belongingness), the intermediary layer (bonding), and the inner layer (binding) of social relations and should exhibit differentiated effects on mental health. We further hypothesize that these structural elements, in sequence, provide functional (i.e., instrumental-expressive, perceived-received, and routine-non-routine) supports which, in turn, prevent or protect against distress. Using data from the 1993-1994 Albany survey, we construct measures for elements of structural and functional support to test the relationship between the two as well as their effects on depression. Results confirm that elements of structural support, as predicted, differentially affect functional supports, and that the elements of both structural and functional supports exert direct effects on depression. Further, structural supports also exert indirect effects on depression, mediated by functional supports.
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
