Identifying Human–Robot Interaction Patterns that Boost Motivation in Rehabilitation Games
Keywords:
Human–robot interaction, motivation, rehabilitation games, robotic therapy, qualitative study, usability, personalizationAbstract
This study aimed to explore human–robot interaction (HRI) patterns that enhance motivation in rehabilitation games, with the goal of informing the design of more engaging therapeutic systems. A qualitative research design was adopted, involving semi-structured interviews with 20 participants in Spain, including patients, therapists, and robotics experts. Purposive sampling was used, and data collection continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis with NVivo 14 software. Coding was conducted in multiple stages, including open, axial, and selective coding, and credibility was ensured through independent coding and consensus discussions. Four overarching themes emerged: (1) emotional engagement in HRI, which included positive emotional responses, trust, empathy, gamification, and stress reduction; (2) personalization and adaptability, encompassing adaptive difficulty, customized feedback, user preferences, rehabilitation goal alignment, pace control, and cultural sensitivity; (3) social and collaborative dimensions, involving teamwork with robots, social comparison, family involvement, therapist integration, and peer encouragement; and (4) usability and interaction quality, which included interface design, physical comfort, technical reliability, interaction smoothness, learning curve, feedback clarity, and accessibility. Across themes, participants emphasized that motivation was maximized when therapy was enjoyable, adaptive, socially meaningful, and reliable. The findings demonstrate that motivation in robotic rehabilitation games is shaped by emotional, personal, social, and usability factors. Designing robots that integrate these interaction patterns may significantly enhance therapy adherence and outcomes. This study highlights the importance of motivational HRI patterns as central to effective rehabilitation, offering practical implications for developers, clinicians, and healthcare systems.
Downloads
References
1. Tugonza A. The Role of Robotics in Rehabilitation Therapy. Nijrms. 2025;6(2):202-9. doi: 10.59298/nijrms/2025/6.2.202209.
2. Bartels L. Rehabilitation Robotics: Enhancing Patient Recovery. Rojbas. 2025;5(2):16-20. doi: 10.59298/rojbas/2025/521620.
3. Baysal Z. Wearable Robotic Exoskeletons for Assisted Mobility: Enhancing Rehabilitation and Quality of Life for Neuromuscular Disorders. Nflsai. 2024;8(1):159. doi: 10.62802/nysced35.
4. Muir BC, Teng THK, Nagle-Chrsitensen A, Lacey A, Geller JC, Stutzenberger M, et al. Occupational Therapists’ Perspectives on the Use of Exoskeletons for Post-Stroke Rehabilitation. F1000research. 2025;14:225. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.161900.1.
5. Selohandono A, Zamroni Z, Rahayu AB. Emerging Neuroplasticity-Based Therapies in Stroke Rehabilitation: Literature Review. Ahmad Dahlan Medical Journal. 2024;5(2):204-18. doi: 10.12928/admj.v5i2.11626.
6. Cinnera AM, Morone G. Motor Recovery in Stroke Rehabilitation Supported by Robot-Assisted Therapy. 2022:304-21. doi: 10.4018/978-1-7998-7430-0.ch015.
7. Thawisuk C. Mapping Robotics and Occupation-Based Practice in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review. Otjr Occupational Therapy Journal of Research. 2025. doi: 10.1177/15394492251347160.
8. Carnevale A, Raso A, Antonacci C, Mancini L, Corradini A, Ceccaroli A, et al. Exploring the Impact of Socially Assistive Robots in Rehabilitation Scenarios. Bioengineering. 2025;12(2):204. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering12020204.
9. Céspedes N, Irfan B, Senft E, Cifuentes CA, Gutiérrez LF, Rincón-Roncancio M, et al. A Socially Assistive Robot for Long-Term Cardiac Rehabilitation in the Real World. Frontiers in Neurorobotics. 2021;15. doi: 10.3389/fnbot.2021.633248.
10. Platz T, Pedersen AL, Deutsch P, Umlauft A-N, Bader S. Analysis of the Therapeutic Interaction Provided by a Humanoid Robot Serving Stroke Survivors as a Therapeutic Assistant for Arm Rehabilitation. Frontiers in Robotics and Ai. 2023;10. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2023.1103017.
11. Fiore S, Battaglino A, Sinatti P, Romero EAS, Ruiz-Rodríguez I, Manca M, et al. The Effectiveness of Robotic Rehabilitation for the Functional Recovery of the Upper Limb in Post-Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review. Retos. 2023;50:91-101. doi: 10.47197/retos.v50.99211.
12. Raz D, Barkan-Slater S, Baum-Cohen I, Vissel G, Lahav-Raz Y, Shapiro A, et al. A Novel Socially Assistive Robotic Platform for Cognitive-Motor Exercises for Individuals With Parkinson's Disease: A Participatory-Design Study From Conception to Feasibility Testing With End Users. Frontiers in Robotics and Ai. 2023;10. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2023.1267458.
13. Vanshika A, Meena G. Balance and Gait Training in Stroke Survivors Using BCI: A Narrative Review. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research. 2024;6(3). doi: 10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i03.21579.
14. Moore B, Herington J, Tekin S. The Integration of Artificial Intelligence-Powered Psychotherapy Chatbots in Pediatric Care: Scaffold or Substitute? The Journal of Pediatrics. 2025. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2025.114509.
15. Germanotta M, Cortellini L, Insalaco S, Aprile I. Effects of Upper Limb Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation Compared With Conventional Therapy in Patients With Stroke: Preliminary Results on a Daily Task Assessed Using Motion Analysis. Sensors. 2023;23(6):3089. doi: 10.3390/s23063089.
16. Park M, Ha YM, Cho HJ, Jeon MY. The Effects of Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation on the Gait Ability of Stroke Patients With Hemiplegia: A Mixed Methods Research Study. Journal of Korean Biological Nursing Science. 2021;23(1):72-82. doi: 10.7586/jkbns.2021.23.1.72.
17. Rikhof C, Feenstra Y, Fleuren JFM, Buurke JH, Prinsen EC, Rietman JS, et al. Robot-Assisted Support Combined With Electrical Stimulation for the Lower Extremity in Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review. Journal of Neural Engineering. 2024;21(2):021001. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/ad377c.
18. Huang Y, Yang B, Wong TWL, Ng SSM, Hu X. Personalized Robots for Long-Term Telerehabilitation After Stroke: A Perspective on Technological Readiness and Clinical Translation. Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2024;4. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2023.1329927.
19. Li X, Qi L, Chen P, Shan G, Yu X, He H, et al. Assistance Level Quantification-Based Human-Robot Interaction Space Reshaping for Rehabilitation Training. Frontiers in Neurorobotics. 2023;17. doi: 10.3389/fnbot.2023.1161007.
20. Lin L, Qing W, Zheng Z, Poon WS, Guo S, Zhang S, et al. Somatosensory Integration in Robot-Assisted Motor Restoration Post-Stroke. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. 2024;16. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2024.1491678.
21. Liu Q, Liu Z, Cheng H, Xu Y, Wang F, Liu L, et al. The Impact of Reminiscent Music Therapy and Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation on Older Stroke Patients: A Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. Frontiers in Neurology. 2024;15. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1345629.
22. Liu Q, Liu Z, Cheng H, Xu Y, Wang F, Liu L, et al. Reminiscent Music Therapy Combined With Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation for Older Patients With Upper Limb Dysfunction After Stroke: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. 2023. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2530460/v1.
23. Dai Y, Shi H, Ji K, Han Y, De MB, Wáng Q. Exercise Preference in Stroke Survivors: A Concept Analysis. Frontiers in Neurology. 2024;15. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1326649.
24. Su D, Hu Z, Wu J, Shang P, Luo Z. Review of Adaptive Control for Stroke Lower Limb Exoskeleton Rehabilitation Robot Based on Motion Intention Recognition. Frontiers in Neurorobotics. 2023;17. doi: 10.3389/fnbot.2023.1186175.
25. Koren Y, Feingold-Polak R, Levy‐Tzedek S. Extended Interviews With Stroke Patients Over a Long-Term Rehabilitation Using Human–Robot or Human–Computer Interactions. International Journal of Social Robotics. 2022;14(8):1893-911. doi: 10.1007/s12369-022-00909-7.
26. Ramli NNN, Asokan A, Mayakrishnan D, Annamalai H. Exploring Stroke Rehabilitation in Malaysia: Are Robots Better Than Humans for Stroke Recuperation? Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2021;28(4):14-23. doi: 10.21315/mjms2021.28.4.3.
27. Jeter R, Greenfield R, Housley SN, Belykh I. Classifying Residual Stroke Severity Using Robotics-Assisted Stroke Rehabilitation: Machine Learning Approach. Jmir Biomedical Engineering. 2024;9:e56980. doi: 10.2196/56980.
28. Jeter R, Greenfield R, Housley SN, Belykh I. Classifying Residual Stroke Severity Using Robotics-Assisted Stroke Rehabilitation: Machine Learning Approach (Preprint). 2024. doi: 10.2196/preprints.56980.
29. Chaki J, Woźniak M. Deep Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Action (2019–2023): A Review on Brain Stroke Detection, Diagnosis, and Intelligent Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Management. Ieee Access. 2024;12:52161-81. doi: 10.1109/access.2024.3383140.
30. Nehrujee A, Prabhakar AT, Balaraman S, Bombatkar R, Prakash H, Samuelkamaleshkumar S, et al. The Facilitators and Barriers to Home-Based Robotic Rehabilitation in India: A Pilot Feasibility Study. Frontiers in Stroke. 2024;2. doi: 10.3389/fstro.2023.1265702.
31. Gunduz ME, Bucak B, Keser Z. Advances in Stroke Neurorehabilitation. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023;12(21):6734. doi: 10.3390/jcm12216734.
32. Wang Y, Ye M, Tong Y, Xiong L, Wu X, Geng C, et al. Effects of Robot-Assisted Therapy on Upper Limb and Cognitive Function in Patients With Stroke: Study Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Study. Trials. 2022;23(1). doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06361-2.
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
