Social Robots in Psychiatry for Patients Suffering from Major Depression—A Pilot Study

Abstract

Introduction

Since the coronavirus pandemic in 2019, interest in implementing and establishing digital media, for example, in the form of humanoid social robots, in everyday psychiatric and psychotherapeutic practice has grown enormously.

Methods

Thirty patients with depressive disorders (24 men and 6 women, mean age [standard deviation]: 39.1 [14.4] and 30 healthy subjects (14 men and 16 women, mean age [standard deviation]: 33.1 [14.2]) were videotaped in a standardised experimental setting while interacting with the robot “Pepper” and completed questionnaires about their attitudes and experiences with it for comparative analysis.

Results

There was no significant difference between the depressed patients and the healthy subjects in their individual statements on the robot’s user-friendliness (system usability scale). Overall, patients reported that they could imagine using Pepper more, even though they did not find it easy to use, understand or master in practical applications, but they felt safer in its presence than healthy subjects. There were significant differences in the statements that the depressed patients attributed less human-like attributes to the robot and considered it less of an interesting enrichment in life in general.

Discussion

Some initial studies and our findings on experiences and attitudes towards the use of a social robot suggest that depressed patients do not differ significantly from healthy subjects in their assessment of the robot’s user-friendliness or in their critical but favourable attitude towards it. Despite all skepticism, also in Germany, patients with depressive disorders appear to be receptive to robot applications, so further clinical expansion of the robot use is recommended.

Keywords

Robots - artificial intelligence - depression - telemedicine

Publication History

Received: 01 November 2025

Accepted after revision: 19 January 2026

Article published online:
06 February 2026

• References

• 1 Guemghar I, Pires de Oliveira Padilha P, Abdel-Baki A. et al. Social Robot Interventions in Mental Health Care and Their Outcomes, Barriers, and Facilitators: Scoping Review. JMIR Ment Health 2022; 9 (04) e36094
• 2 Koh WQ, Felding SA, Budak KB. et al. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of social robots for older adults and people with dementia: a scoping review. BMC Geriatrics 2021; 21: 351
• 3 Lee EE, Torous J, De Choudhury M. et al. Artificial Intelligence for Mental Health Care: Clinical Applications, Barriers, Facilitators, and Artificial Wisdom. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging 2021; 6 (09) 856-864
• 4 Pham KT, Nabizadeh A, Selek S. Artificial Intelligence and Chatbots in Psychiatry. Psychiatric Q 2022; 93: 249-253
• 5 Bangor A, Kortum PT, Miller JT. An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. Int J Human-Comput Interact 2008; 24 (06) 574-594
• 6 Stoevesandt D, Jahn P, Watzke S. et al. Comparison of Acceptance and Knowledge Transfer in Patient Information Before an MRI Exam Administered by Humanoid Robot Versus a Tablet Computer: A Randomized Controlled Study. Rofo 2021; 193 (08) 947-954
• 7 Baisch S, Kolling T, Schall A. et al. Acceptance of Social Robots by Elder People: Does Psychosocial Functioning Matter?. Int J Soc Rob 2017; 9: 293-307
• 8 Kron FW, Gjerde CL, Sen A. et al. Medical student attitudes toward video games and related new media technologies in medical education. BMC Med Educ 2010; 10: 50
• 9 Abel M, Kuz S, Patel HJ. et al. Anthropomorphic or non-anthropomorphic? Effects of biological sex in observation of actions in a digital human model and gantry robot model. Front Neurorobot 2022; 16: 937452
• 10 Askin G, Saltik I, Boz TE. et al. Gendered Actions with a Genderless Robot: gender Attribution to Humanoid Robots in Action. Int J Soc Robot 2023; 20: 1-17
• 11 Abel M, Buccino G, Binkofski FC. Perception of robotic actions and the influence of gender. Front Psychol 2024; 15: 1295279
• 12 Abel M, Kuz S, Patel HJ. et al. Gender Effects in Observation of Robotic and Humanoid Actions. Front Psychol 2020; 11: 797
• 13 Guo X, Wang C, Wan X. Influence of a robotic companion on women’s food choices: Evidence from imaginary task. Appl Psychol Health Well Being 2024; 16 (04) 2266-2282
• 14 Ding Yi GuoR, Lyu W. et al. Gender effect in human-machine communication: A neurophysiology study. Front Hum Neurosci 2024; 18: 1376221
• 15 Matsushima T, Yoshikawa Y, Matsuo K. Development of depression assessment tools using humanoid robots - Can tele-operated robots talk with depressive persons like humans?. J Psychiatry Res 2024; 170: 187-194
• 16 Mavrogiorgou P, Böhme P, Kramer M. et al. Virtual reality in teaching using mentally ill patient avatars. Der Nervenarzt 2024; 95 (03) 247-253