1. A systematic literature review of the studies on social robotics in autism therapy found many positive implications in the use of social robots in therapy.
2. It is necessary to clarify whether sex, intelligence quotient, and age of participants affect the outcome of therapy and whether any beneficial effects only occur during the robotic session.
3. The past decade's work in SAR systems designed for autism therapy is discussed by analyzing robot design decisions, human-robot interactions, and system evaluations.
The article provides a comprehensive overview of the use of robots as new tools in therapy and education for children with autism. The article is well-researched and provides an extensive review of existing literature on the topic. However, there are some potential biases that should be noted. For example, the article does not explore counterarguments or present both sides equally; it focuses solely on the positive implications of using robots in therapy and education for children with autism. Additionally, there is no discussion about possible risks associated with using robots in this context or how these risks can be mitigated. Furthermore, there is no evidence provided to support some of the claims made in the article, such as whether sex, intelligence quotient, and age of participants affect the outcome of therapy or whether any beneficial effects only occur during the robotic session. In conclusion, while this article provides a comprehensive overview of existing literature on this topic, it should be read critically to ensure that all potential biases are taken into account before drawing any conclusions from its findings.