Replacement of Highly Educated Surgical Assistants by Robot Technology in Working Life: Paradigm Shift in the Service Sector

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 2 - Trang 431-438 - 2010
Kristian Wasen1
1Business & Design Lab, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

Tóm tắt

This article highlights the thus far unexplained social and professional effects raised by robotization in surgical applications, and further develops an understanding of social acceptance among professional users of robots in the healthcare sector. It presents findings from ethnographic workplace research on human-robot interactions (HRI) in a population of twenty-three professionals. When considering all the findings, the latest da Vinci system equipped with four robotic arms substitutes two table-side surgical assistants, in contrast to the single-arm AESOP robot that only substitutes one surgical assistant. The adoption of robots and the replacement of surgical assistants provide clear evidence that robots are well-accepted among operating surgeons. Because HRI decrease the operating surgeon’s dependence on social assistance and since they replace the work tasks of surgical assistants, the robot is considered a surrogate artificial work partner and worker. This finding is consistent with prior HRI research indicating that users, through their cooperation with robots, often become less reliant on supportive social actions. This research relates to societal issues and provides the first indication that highly educated knowledge workers are beginning to be replaced by robot technology in working life and therefore points towards a paradigm shift in the service sector.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Broadbent E, Stafford R, MacDonald B (2009) Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: review and future directions. Int J Soc Robot 1(4):319–330 Wasen K (2005) Person-friendly robot interaction: social, psychological and technological issues in health care work. In: Proc 14th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, August 13–15, Nashville, USA, pp 643–648 Kiesler S, Hinds P (2004) Introduction to this special issue on human-robot interaction. Hum-Comput Interact 19:1–8 Wasen K (2004) Multi-disciplinary socio-technical management: integrating robot technology and management issues. In: Proceedings, IEEE 21st international symposium on automation and robotics in construction, September 21–25, Jeju, South Korea, pp 21–24 Fox NJ (1992) The social meaning of surgery. Open University Press, Milton Keynes Conger K (2004) Remote control. Stanf Med Mag. Online edition http://mednews.stanford.edu/stanmed/2004Spring/robots.html Severinson-Eklundh K, Green A, Huttenrauch H (2003) Social and collaborative aspects of interaction with a service robot. Robot Auton Syst 42(3–4):223–234 Yanco HA, Drury JL, Scholtz J (2004) Beyond usability evaluation: analysis of human-robot interaction at a major robotics competition. Hum-Comput Interact 19(1–2):117–149 Weiss A, Wurhofer D, Lankes M, Tscheligi M (2009) Autonomous vs. tele-operated: how people perceive human-robot collaboration with HRP-2. In: Proc of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on human robot interaction, March 11–13, La Jolla, California, USA, pp 257–258 Young JE, Hawkins R, Sharlin E, Igarashi T (2009) Toward acceptable domestic robots: applying insights from social psychology. Int J Soc Robot 1(1):95–108 Wasen K (2008) Robotkirurgisk Tjansteproduktion–Distanserad Narhet. Doctoral thesis in Swedish with English summary: Robot surgery—remote closeness providing a new method of human-robot interaction within top-level service production, University of Gothenburg, School of Business, Economics and Law Dautenhahn K (2004) Robots we like to live with?!—A developmental perspective on a personalized, life-long robot companion. In: Proceedings IEEE Roman 2004, 13th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, 20–22 September 2004, Kurashiki, Okayama, Japan. IEEE Press, New York, pp 17–22 Haasch A, Hohenner S, Hüwel S, Kleinehagenbrock M, Lang S, Toptsis I, Fink GA, Fritsch J, Wrede B, Sagerer G (2004) BIRON—the bielefeld robot companion. In: Prassler E, Lawitzky G, Fiorini P, Hägele M (eds) Proc international workshop on advances in service robotics, Stuttgart, Germany, May 2004. Fraunhofer IRB Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 27–32. Wrede B, Haasch A, Hofemann N, Hohenner S, Hüwel S, Kleinehagenbrock M, Lang S, Li S, Toptsis I, Fink GA, Fritsch J, Sagerer G (2004) Research issues for designing robot companions: BIRON as a case study. In: Proc IEEE conference on mechatronics & robotics Breazeal C, Buchsbaum D, Gray J, Gatenby D, Blumberg B (2005) Learning from and about others: towards using imitation to bootstrap the social understanding of others by robots. Artif Life 11(1–2):31–62 Nakauchi Y, Simmons R (2002) A social robot that stands in line. Auton Robots 12(3):313–324 Hinds PJ, Roberts TL, Jones H (2004) Whose job is it anyway? A study of human–robot interaction in a collaborative task. Hum Comput Interact 17:151–181 Marble JL, Bruemmer DJ, Few DA, Dudenhoeffer DD (2004). Evaluation of supervisory vs. peer-peer interaction for human-robot teams. In: Proc 37th annual Hawaii international conference on systems sciences, January 4–8, Big Island, Hawaii Yanco AY, Drury J (2004) Classifying human-robot interaction: an updated taxonomy. In: Proc IEEE int conference on systems, man and cybernetics, vol 3, 10–13 October, pp 2841–2846 Salter T, Dautenhahn K, Boekhorst R (2006) Learning about natural human–robot interaction styles. Robot Auton Syst 54(2):127–134 Kuzuoka H, Furusawa Y, Kobayashi N, Yamazaki K (2007) Effect of displaying a remote operator’s face on a media robot. In: Int conference on control, automation and systems, vol 1–6, 17–20 October, pp 2409–2412 Bicionek SR (1995) Agent systems that negotiate and learn. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 42:265–288 Hauptmann AG, Rudnicky AI (1988) Talking to computers: an empirical investigation. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 28:583–604 Nass C, Moon Y (2000) Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. J Soc Issues 56(1):81–103 Nass C, Steuer J, Henriksen L, Dryer DC (1994) Machines, social attributions, and ethopoeia: performance assessments of computers subsequent to “self”- or “other”-evaluations. Int J Hum Comput Stud 40:543–559 Murphy RR (2004) Human-robot interaction in rescue robotics. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev 34(2):138–153 Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Sage, London Geertz C (1973) The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books, New York Patton M (1980) Qualitative evaluation methods. Sage, London van Maanen J (1988) Tales of the field: on writing ethnography. University of Chicago Press, Chicago Hemal AK, Menon M (2002) Laparoscopy, robot, telesurgery and urology: future perspective. E-Medicine 48(1):39–41 Aanestad M, Edwin B, Marvik R (2003) Medical image quality as a socio-technical phenomenon. Methods Inf Med 42:302–306 Mondada L (2003) Working with video: how surgeons produce video records of their actions. Vis Stud 18:58–73