Socially assistive robots and meaningful work: the case of aged care.

IF 3.7 2区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Cristina Voinea, Tenzin Wangmo
{"title":"Socially assistive robots and meaningful work: the case of aged care.","authors":"Cristina Voinea, Tenzin Wangmo","doi":"10.1057/s41599-025-05498-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As socially assistive robots (SARs) become increasingly integrated into aged care, it becomes essential to ask: how do these technologies affect caregiving work? Do SARs foster or diminish the conditions conducive to meaningful work? And why does it matter if SARs make caregiving more or less meaningful? This paper addresses these questions by examining the relationship between SARs and the meaningfulness of care work. It argues that SARs should be designed to foster meaningful care work. This presupposes, as we will argue, empowering caregivers to enhance their skills and moral virtues, helping them preserve a sense of purpose, and supporting the integration of caregiving with other aspects of caregivers' personal lives. If caregivers see their work as meaningful, this positively affects not only their well-being but also the well-being of care recipients. We begin by outlining the conditions under which work becomes meaningful, and then we apply this framework to caregiving. We next evaluate how SARs influence these conditions, identifying both opportunities and risks. The discussion concludes with design recommendations to ensure SARs foster meaningful caregiving practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":52336,"journal":{"name":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","volume":"12 1","pages":"1070"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12254036/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05498-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As socially assistive robots (SARs) become increasingly integrated into aged care, it becomes essential to ask: how do these technologies affect caregiving work? Do SARs foster or diminish the conditions conducive to meaningful work? And why does it matter if SARs make caregiving more or less meaningful? This paper addresses these questions by examining the relationship between SARs and the meaningfulness of care work. It argues that SARs should be designed to foster meaningful care work. This presupposes, as we will argue, empowering caregivers to enhance their skills and moral virtues, helping them preserve a sense of purpose, and supporting the integration of caregiving with other aspects of caregivers' personal lives. If caregivers see their work as meaningful, this positively affects not only their well-being but also the well-being of care recipients. We begin by outlining the conditions under which work becomes meaningful, and then we apply this framework to caregiving. We next evaluate how SARs influence these conditions, identifying both opportunities and risks. The discussion concludes with design recommendations to ensure SARs foster meaningful caregiving practices.

社会辅助机器人和有意义的工作:以老年护理为例。
随着社会辅助机器人(sar)越来越多地融入老年护理,有必要问:这些技术如何影响护理工作?非典是促进还是削弱有利于有意义工作的条件?非典是否会让护理变得更有意义又有什么关系呢?本文通过研究SARs与护理工作的意义之间的关系来解决这些问题。它认为,SARs的设计应该是为了促进有意义的护理工作。正如我们将要讨论的那样,这需要赋予护理人员能力以提高他们的技能和道德美德,帮助他们保持使命感,并支持将护理与护理人员个人生活的其他方面相结合。如果照顾者认为他们的工作是有意义的,这不仅会对他们的幸福产生积极影响,也会对被照顾者的幸福产生积极影响。我们首先概述工作变得有意义的条件,然后我们将这个框架应用于护理。接下来,我们将评估SARs如何影响这些条件,确定机遇和风险。讨论最后提出了设计建议,以确保SARs促进有意义的护理实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications Arts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.70%
发文量
405
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信