# Human-Centered Reflections on Care Robots: A Comparative Study of Caregiver Perspectives

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.02411 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.02411/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 9 of its 78 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Aug 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [From Learning to Relearning: A Framework for Diminishing Bias in Social Robot Navigation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.02647/) (2021)
- [Syn-Mediverse: A Multimodal Synthetic Dataset for Intelligent Scene Understanding of Healthcare Facilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03193/) (2023)
- [Fairness and Bias in Robot Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.03444/) (2022)
- [Doing Right by Not Doing Wrong in Human-Robot Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.02654/) (2022)
- [Robots in healthcare as envisioned by care professionals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.00776/) (2022)
- [Dynamic Robot-Assisted Surgery with Hierarchical Class-Incremental Semantic Segmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.01713/) (2025)
- [Designing for Difference: How Human Characteristics Shape Perceptions of Collaborative Robots](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.16480/) (2025)
- [Robotics Technology in Mental Health Care](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1511.02281/) (2015)
- [Ethical Aspects of the Use of Social Robots in Elderly Care -- A Systematic Qualitative Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09224/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Care robots are increasingly being introduced into healthcare settings, raising important questions about their acceptance and ethical implementation. To better understand these challenges, this study investigates caregivers' perceptions of four categories of care robots: delivering supplies, helping patients into bed, monitoring vital signs, and assisting with mobility. We conducted a mixed-methods study employing a mixed-factorial design in which 298 caregivers from the United States, Mexico, and Chile evaluated all four robot categories. Quantitative measures integrated constructs from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, the Cognitive-Affective-Normative model, and overall acceptance ratings. Qualitative data were collected through open-ended questions and analyzed using a literature-informed ethical framework. The results indicate that participants across countries generally evaluated care robots positively, particularly for logistical and physically demanding tasks rather than those requiring intensive interpersonal interaction. The qualitative findings provide further insight into stakeholders' views of the ethical implications of care robot use. Participants emphasized potential benefits such as reduced workload, lower risk, and greater patient autonomy, while also expressing concerns about dependability, the need for human oversight, and potential job displacement. Although many ethical concerns were shared across countries, participants differed in how they interpreted and prioritized them. These findings advance a context-sensitive and socially informed understanding of responsible design and implementation of care robots.