Delivering Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Using A Conversational Social Robot
TABLE I: Age, gender, SLUMS score, PHQ-9 score (pre and post study), and GDS score (pre and post study) for each of the subjects.
['Sbj', 'Age/Gender', 'SLUMS score', 'PHQ-9 score pre', 'PHQ-9 score post', 'GDS score pre', 'GDS score post']
The four participants for this study were chosen from Eaton Senior Communities, an independent living facility located in Lakewood, CO. Additionally, each subject was selected to have availability for two, one-hour sessions twice a week. Prior to participating, subjects were briefed fully on the study design and consented to their involvement, with the proper Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals for human-subjects in place. GDS scores improved for two out of the four subjects, stayed the same for one out of the four subjects, and worsened in one of the four subjects. Subject 3 remained more variable throughout the treatment period, with session 6 demonstrating an unusually high improvement in score. Subject 1 was the most consistent in scores, either not improving or only improving by a small amount. Subjects 2 and 4 had more consistent increases in mood throughout the duration of the therapy. Mental health evaluations produced inconsistent results. Specifically, with the GDS results, subject 4 did not show a change in scores and the score for subject 2 increased. The subjects that either did not show improved scores or showed worsened scores were not the same for both tests. Differences between which subject did not improve between the two tests could be explained by individual characteristics and the unique approaches each test takes to measuring symptoms of depression. For example, the PHQ-9 is a longer, more comprehensive test, and the GDS tends to be a more surface level examination, which may reflect a difference in the scores.