Research-Driven,
Evidence-Based Impact.

UT Dallas Callier Center

Background:
Research suggests that despite individual differences in performance, children with ASD show more social engagement with a robot as compared to humans or other technological devices (Diehl et al., 2014; Bekele et al., 2013). This study investigates differences in engagement related to the child’s level of functioning (i.e., minimally verbal vs. fluent) and therapy condition (i.e., student-led vs. robot-led) while playing a follow-the-leader type game.

Key Impact Result:
This study showed that children on the Autism Spectrum engaged with Milo 87.5% of the time vs just 2-3% of the time with a human therapist alone.

Children's Therapy Works

Background:
Dr. Shelley Margow, owner and clinical director of Children’s Therapy Works, used Quantitative Electroencephalo-graph (QEEG) to map the cognitive function of her patients’ brainwaves before and after working with RoboKind's Program.

Key Impact Result:
After three months of working with Milo, her students’ mental maps showed a huge change in how their brains received and processed information. This correlated with the changes in the ASD learner’s overall behavior.

Orange Grove Center

Background:
Established over 60 years ago, the Orange Grove Center is a nonprofit based in Tennessee. It serves about 700 adult individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities. This qualitative impact study examines specific student outcomes.

Key Impact Result:
Since using Milo, Orange Grove students' attention span improved dramatically. The students also successfully developed emotional regulation skills and coping techniques like counting to 10 and taking deep breaths to communicate when they started to get angry or frustrated.

International Society for Autism Research

Background:

"Autistic children often have difficulty recognizing emotions and facial expressions. Several existing projects have shown promise in using robot-assisted interventions for social and academic skills teaching with autistic children, including emotion recognition. Robots can be more predictable and less complex than interaction with humans, and may be more “comfortable” for autistic children. Little is known, however, about the levels of language, cognitive skill, or sensory tolerance that are necessary or desirable for robot-assisted interventions to be implemented effectively for autistic children."

Key Impact Result:

"A humanoid robot can be a feasible, meaningful, and engaging tool in an emotion-recognition teaching program for autistic children with limited spoken communication. Indeed, more children successfully engaged with the robot and the tasks than was initially predicted by researchers and parents. Robot-assisted intervention may be particularly valuable for those children who may not easily access other interventions due to their language or ability."