A

Exploring Mediated Communication with Older Adults: Comparing AR Avatars, Telepresence Robots, and Face-to-Face Interaction

ACM International Conference on Interactive Media Experiences, pp. 1–13

Abstract

Older adults, a growing demographic, face an increased risk of experiencing loneliness and are less exposed to emerging communication technologies. Augmented reality (AR) avatars and telepresence robots have been proposed as tools to foster social connection, yet their suitability for older users remains underexplored. We present an exploratory study with ten healthy older adults who engaged in both conversational and spatial collaboration tasks using AR avatar-mediated communication, robot-mediated communication, and face-to-face interaction. We collected self-reported measures of co-presence, social presence, closeness, uncanny valley, preferences, and open feedback. Our findings suggest that telepresence robots enhanced co-presence, while avatars were valued for their expressivity and humanlike qualities. Task type influenced co-presence in spatial collaboration only during communication using the telepresence robot. Other measures, such as social presence and closeness, were unaffected by task type or representation. While neither technology outperformed face-to-face interaction, both were positively received, underscoring their potential to address the social needs of older adults and highlighting the importance of enhancing nonverbal expressivity, particularly nonverbal cues in mediated communication. Ultimately, our results contribute to the fundamental understanding of mediated communication with older adults, motivating further empirical work to confirm and extend these findings.

Authors 15

  1. Birmingham City University

    Affiliation as printed

    Birmingham City University, Birmingham, United Kingdom

  2. RWTH Aachen University

    Affiliation as printed

    RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

  3. University of Glasgow

    Affiliation as printed

    Glasgow University, Glasgow, United Kingdom

  4. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Media Psychology and Media Design, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Thüringen, Germany

  5. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Media Psychology and Media Design Group, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  6. Felix Immohr Aachen

    RWTH Aachen University

    Affiliation as printed

    RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

  7. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Neuroinformatics and Cognitive Robotics, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  8. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Virtual Worlds and Digital Games Group, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  9. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Virtual Worlds and Digital Games Group, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  10. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Neuroinformatics and Cognitive Robotics, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  11. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Virtual Worlds and Digital Games Group, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  12. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Media Psychology and Media Design Group, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  13. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Neuroinformatics and Cognitive Robotics, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany

  14. Technische Universität Ilmenau

    Affiliation as printed

    Virtual Worlds and Digital Games Group, Ilmenau University of Technology, Ilmenau, Germany

  15. RWTH Aachen University

    Affiliation as printed

    RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

Cited by 0 stored of 0

No patents citing this paper on Lens.org (checked 2026-10-06).

References 75