Fig 1.
Exemplary Appearance of an AIBO Robot.
This image illustrates an AIBO robot wearing a blue collar that served as a robotic social companion in this study.
Fig 2.
The experimental environment encompasses six individual stalls separated by constructed walls, allowing six participants to complete a session simultaneously.
Fig 3.
Study Procedure Divided in Pre-Experimental and Experimental Stage.
In the pre-experimental stage, questionnaire data on participants’ medical background, personality, and opinion towards dogs and robots were collected, and an orientation session introducing AIBO and the study was conducted. The experimental phase consisted of two counter-balanced bonding phases, one with a dog and one with an AIBO, which each lasted for four weeks and encompassed twelve interaction sessions. Each bonding phase started with the introduction of the bonding partner and the conduct of behavioral tasks and ended with the completion of a questionnaire capturing attachment to the respective bonding partner, a repetition of the questionnaire collecting opinions towards dogs and robots and behavioral tasks, and an fMRI scanning session. During each bonding phase, urine samples were collected twice during the first, sixth, and twelfth interaction sessions, later referred to as time stages “Begin”, “Middle”, and “End”.
Table 1.
Phases of Thematic Analysis by Braun and Clarke (2006).
Fig 4.
Average SOLD for Bonding Partners over Time.
Average SOLD are shown for Partner (Dog, AIBO) over Time (Begin, Middle, End). Error bars represent the mean standard errors.
Fig 5.
Average SOLD for Order of Bonding Partners.
Average SOLD are shown for Order (Dog 1st, AIBO 1st). Error bars represent the mean standard errors.
Fig 6.
Average LAPS Sum Score for Bonding Partners.
Average LAPS sum scores are shown for Partner (Dog, AIBO). Error bars represent the mean, standard errors. ** p < .01 (two-tailed).
Fig 7.
Frequency of Responses (RDQ-Q23).
The percentage of the response options “Yes” and “No” to item Q23 of the RDQ (“Do you think a nice companion robot can be as good as a companion dog?”) are shown.
Fig 8.
Thematic Analysis Map According to the Approach by Braun & Clarke (2006).
The figure depicts the overarching advantages of dogs and AIBOs as social companions that were extracted from previously coded participant responses to the items Q25 (“List those features that make dogs better than robots, however skillful and cute the later are. “) and Q26 (“What kind of advantages would a well-functioning, intelligent dog-like robot have compared to a real dog?”) of the RDQ following the thematic analysis approach by Braun and Clarke [52]. The lowest hierarchy levels depict extracted response codes, the middle levels depict generated advantages, and the highest levels depict the social companion that is referred to.