[
Addesi, A.R., & Pachet, F. (2005). Experiences with a musical machine: Musical style replication in 3 to 5 year old children. British Journal of Music Education, 22(1), 21–46.10.1017/S0265051704005972
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ali, S., Moroso, T., & Breazeal, C. (2019). Can children learn creativity from a social robot?. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 359–368). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/3325480.3325499
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Alves-Oliveira, P., Arriaga, P., Hoffman, G., & Paiva, A. (2016). Boosting children’s creativity through creative interactions with social robots. In 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 591–592). IEEE.10.1109/HRI.2016.7451871
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Alves-Oliveira, P., Arriaga, P., Paiva, A., & Hoffman, G. (2019). Guide to build YOLO, a creativity-stimulating robot for children. HardwareX, 6, e00074.10.1016/j.ohx.2019.e00074
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Alves-Oliveira, P., Chandak, A., Cloutier, I., Kompella, P., Moegenburg, P., & Bastos Pires, AE (2018). Yolo a robot that will make your creativity boom. Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (pp. 335–336).10.1145/3173386.3177822
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Alves-Oliveira, P., Gomes, S., Chandak, A., Arriaga, P., Hoffman, G., & Paiva, A. (2020). Software architecture for YOLO, a creativity-stimulating robot. SoftwareX, 11, 100461.10.1016/j.softx.2020.100461
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Arias, E., Eden, H., Fischer, G., Gorman, A., & Scharff, E. (2000). Transcending the Individual Human Mind–Creating Shared Understanding Through Collaborative Design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 7, 1 (2000), 84–113.10.1145/344949.345015
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Asada, M., Hosoda, K., Kuniyoshi, Y., Ishiguro, H., Inui, T., Yoshikawa, Y., Ogino, M. & Yoshida, C. (2009). Cognitive developmental robotics: A survey. IEEE Trans. on Autonomous Mental Development, 1(1), 12–34.10.1109/TAMD.2009.2021702
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Belpaeme, T., Kennedy, J., Ramachandran, A., Scassellati, B., & Tanaka, F. (2018). Social robots for education: A review. Science robotics, 3(21), eaat5954.10.1126/scirobotics.aat5954
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bretan, M., & Weinberg, G. (2016). A survey of robotic musicianship. Communications of the ACM, 59(5), 100–109.10.1145/2818994
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674251083
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Calinon, S., Guenter, F., & Billard, A. (2005). Goal-directed imitation in a humanoid robot. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 299–304). IEEE.10.1109/ROBOT.2005.1570135
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Calinon, S., Li, Z., Alizadeh, T., Tsagarakis, N.G., & Caldwell, D.G. (2012). Teaching of bimanual skills in a compliant humanoid robot. In Intl Workshop on Human-Friendly Robotics (HFR).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cangelosi, A. & Schlesinger, M. (2018). From babies to robots: the contribution of developmental robotics to developmental psychology. Child Development Perspectives, 12(3):183–188.10.1111/cdep.12282
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chen, H., Park, H.W., & Breazeal, C. (2020). Teaching and learning with children: Impact of reciprocal peer learning with a social robot on children’s learning and emotional engagement. Computers & Education, 150, 103836.10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103836
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chung, S. (2019). Drawing Operations, 2015.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391–404.10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807916.018
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dautenhahn, K., & Billard, A. (1999). Bringing up robots or – the psychology of socially intelligent robots: from theory to implementation. In Proceedings of Autonomous Agents (pp. 366–367). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/301136.301237
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dautenhahn, K., Ogden, B., & Quick, T. (2002). From embodied to socially embedded agents – implications for interaction-aware robots. Cognitive Systems Research, 3, 397–428.10.1016/S1389-0417(02)00050-5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dautenhahn K. (2007). Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human-robot interaction. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 362(1480), 679–704.10.1098/rstb.2006.2004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Davis, N.M., Popova, Y., Sysoev, I., Hsiao, C.P., Zhang, D., & Magerko, B. (2014). Building Artistic Computer Colleagues with an Enactive Model of Creativity. In ICCC (pp. 38–45).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
De Graaf, M.M.A., Allouch, S.B., & Klamer, T. (2015). Sharing a life with Harvey: Exploring the acceptance of and relationship-building with a social robot. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.03010.1016/j.chb.2014.10.030
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Duffy, B.R. (2003). Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-8890(02)00374-310.1016/S0921-8890(02)00374-3
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133–156.10.1080/13639080020028747
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Activity theory: A well-kept secret. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–38). New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511812774
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fitzgerald, T., Goel, A.K., & Thomaz, A. (2017). Human-Robot Co-Creativity: Task Transfer on a Spectrum of Similarity. In ICCC (pp. 104–111).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn K. (2002). A survey of socially interactive robots: concepts,design, and applications. Technical Report No. CMU-RI-TR-02-29. Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gazeau, J.P., & Zeghloul, S. (2012). The artist robot: A robot drawing like a human artist. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (pp. 486–491). IEEE.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gibson, J.J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Glăvenau, V.P. (2012). What can be done with an egg? Creativity, material objects and the theory of affordances. Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 192–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.1310.1002/jocb.13
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Glăvenau, V.P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: the five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 17, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/a002952810.1037/a0029528
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Glăveanu, V.P., Hanchett Hanson, M., Baer, J., Barbot, B., Clapp, E.P., Corazza, G.E., ... & Sternberg, R.J. (2020). Advancing creativity theory and research: A socio-cultural manifesto. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(3), 741–745.10.1002/jocb.395
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gordon, G., Breazeal, C., & Engel, S. (2015). Can children catch curiosity from a social robot?. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 91–98).10.1145/2696454.2696469
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gubenko, A., Kirsch, C., Smilek, J.N., Lubart, T., & Houssemand, C. (2021). Educational Robotics and Robot Creativity: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8(178).10.3389/frobt.2021.662030
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Guerin, F., Ferreira, P. (2019). Robot Manipulation in Open Environments: New Perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental System, 12(3), (pp. 669–675).10.1109/TCDS.2019.2921098
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hoffmann, O. (2016). On Modeling Human-Computer Co-Creativity. In S. Kunifuji, G.A. Papadopoulos, A.M.J. Skulimowski, & J. Kacprzyk, (Eds.), Knowledge, Information and Creativity Support Systems (pp. 37–48). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-27478-2_3
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hoffman, G., & Weinberg, G. (2011). Interactive improvisation with a robotic marimba player. Autonomous Robots, 31(2–3), 133–153.10.1007/s10514-011-9237-0
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Höflich, J.R., & El Bayed, A. (2015). Perception, Acceptance, and the Social Construction of Robots—Exploratory Studies. Social Robots from a Human Perspective, 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15672-9_410.1007/978-3-319-15672-9_4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/1881.001.0001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jones, R.A. (2017). What makes a robot ‘social’? Social Studies of Science, 47(4), 556–579.10.1177/0306312717704722
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kahn Jr, P.H., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Freier, N.G., Severson, R.L., Gill, B.T., ... & Shen, S. (2012). “Robovie, you’ll have to go into the closet now”: Children’s social and moral relationships with a humanoid robot. Developmental psychology, 48(2), 303.10.1037/a0027033
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kahn, P.H., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Gill, B.T., Shen, S., Ruckert, J.H., & Gary, H.E. (2016). Human creativity can be facilitated through interacting with a social robot. In 2016 11th ACM / IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 173–180). IEEE.10.1109/HRI.2016.7451749
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kantosalo, A., Falk, M., & Jordanous, A. (2021). Embodiment in 18th Century Depictions of Human-Machine Co-Creativity. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8(190).10.3389/frobt.2021.662036
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kato, I., Ohteru, S., Shirai, K., Matsushima, T., Narita, S., Sugano, S., ... & Fujisawa, E. (1987). The robot musician ‘wabot-2’ (waseda robot-2). Robotics, 3(2), (pp. 143-155).10.1016/0167-8493(87)90002-7
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leont’ev, A.N. (1978). Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leite, I., Martinho, C., & Paiva, A. (2013). Social Robots for Long-Term Interaction: A Survey. International Journal of Social Robotics, 5(2), 291–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0178-y10.1007/s12369-013-0178-y
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lindblom, J., & Ziemke, T. (2003), Social situatedness of natural and artificial intelligence: Vygotsky and beyond. Adaptive Behavior, 11, 79–96.10.1177/10597123030112002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Luo, RC, & Liu, YJ (2018). Robot Artist Performs Cartoon Style Facial Portrait Painting. In 2018 IEEE / RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (pp. 7683–7688). IEEE.10.1109/IROS.2018.8594147
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lungarella, M., Metta, G., Pfeifer, R., & Sandini, G. (2004). Developmental robotics: a survey. Connection science, 15(4), 151–190.10.1080/09540090310001655110
]Search in Google Scholar
[
MacDorman, K.F. (2019). La Vallée de l’Étrange de Mori Masahiro. e-Phaïstos, (VII-2). https://doi.org/10.4000/ephaistos.533310.4000/ephaistos.5333
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Magnenat-Thalmann, N., Yuan, J., Thalmann, D., & You, B.-J. (Eds.). (2016). Context Aware Human-Robot and Human-Agent Interaction. Human–Computer Interaction Series. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19947-410.1007/978-3-319-19947-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Min, H., Yi, C., Luo, R., Zhu, J. & Bi, S. (2016). Affordance research in developmental robotics: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, 8(4), 237–255.10.1109/TCDS.2016.2614992
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mitchell, M. (2021). Why AI is Harder Than We Think. In: arXiv: 2104.1287110.1145/3449639.3465421
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mori, M., MacDorman, K., & Kageki, N. (2012). The Uncanny Valley [From the Field]. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 19(2), 98–100. https://doi.org/10.1109/mra.2012.219281110.1109/MRA.2012.2192811
]Search in Google Scholar
[
OECD. (2019). OECD future of education and skills 2030–Conceptual learning framework–Concept note: Student agency for 2030. Paris: Editions OECD.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
OECD (2021). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021 : Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots. Paris: Editions OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/589b283f-en10.1787/589b283f-en
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oliveira, P.A. (2020). Boosting children’s creativity through creative interactions with social robots. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348293686_Boosting_Children’s_Creativity_through_Creative_Interactions_with_Social_Robots
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Otero, N., Saunders, J., Dautenhahn, K., & Nehaniv, C.L. (2008). Teaching robot companions: the role of scaffolding and event structuring. Connection Science, 20(2–3), 111–134.10.1080/09540090802091925
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pachet, F. (2003). The continuator: Musical interaction with style. Journal of New Music Research, 32(3), 333–341.10.1076/jnmr.32.3.333.16861
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pakrasi, I., Chakraborty, N., Cuan, C., Berl, E., Rizvi, W., & LaViers, A. (2018). Dancing droids: an expressive layer for mobile robots developed within choreographic practice. In International Conference on Social Robotics (pp. 410-420). Springer, Cham.10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_40
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pan, Y., Kim, MG, & Suzuki, K. (2010). A Robot Musician Interacting with a Human Partner through Initiative Exchange. In NIME (pp. 166-169).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Park, H.W., Rosenberg-Kima, R., Rosenberg, M., Gordon, G., & Breazeal, C. (2017). Growing growth mindset with a social robot peer. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 137-145).10.1145/2909824.3020213
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Park, H.W., Grover, I., Spaulding, S., Gomez, L., & Breazeal, C. (2019). A model-free affective reinforcement learning approach to personalization of an autonomous social robot companion for early literacy education. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 33, No. 01, pp. 687–694).10.1609/aaai.v33i01.3301687
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peng, H., Zhou, C., Hu, H., Chao, F., & Li, J. (2015). Robotic dance in social robotics — a taxonomy. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 45(3), 281–293.10.1109/THMS.2015.2393558
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Resnick, L.B., Levine, J.M., & Teasley, S.D. (Eds.). (1991). Perspectives on socially shared cognition. American Psychological Association.10.1037/10096-000
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Runco, M.A., & Jaeger, G.J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96.10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Russell, S.J., & Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial Intelligence-A Modern Approach (3. internat. ed.). Pearson Education.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Saerbeck, M., Schut, T., Bartneck, C., & Janse, M.D. (2010, April). Expressive robots in education: varying the degree of social supportive behavior of a robotic tutor. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 10 (pp. 1613–1622).10.1145/1753326.1753567
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sandry, E. (2017). Creative collaborations with machines. Philosophy & Technology, 30(3), 305–319.10.1007/s13347-016-0240-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Smith, G. F. (1998). Idea-generation techniques: A formulary of active ingredients. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(2), 107–134.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1998.tb00810.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Smith L.B., & Gasser M. (2005). The development of embodied cognition: six lessons from babies. Artificial Life, 11, 13–30.10.1162/1064546053278973
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Suzuki, K., & Hashimoto, S. (2004). Robotic interface for embodied interaction via dance and musical performance. Proceedings of the IEEE, 92(4), 656–671.10.1109/JPROC.2004.825886
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thrun, S., Hähnel, D., Ferguson, D., Montemerlo, M., Triebel, R., Burgard, W., Baker, C., Omohundro, Z., Thayer, S., & Whittaker, W. (2003). A system for volumetric robotic mapping of abandoned mines. In 2003 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 3I(10) (pp. 4270–4275).10.1109/ROBOT.2003.1242260
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thrun, S. (2004). Toward a framework for human-robot interaction. Human–Computer Interaction, 19(1–2), 9–24.10.1207/s15327051hci1901&2_2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Toubia, O., Berger, J., & Eliashberg, J. (2021). How quantifying the shape of stories predicts their success. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(26).10.1073/pnas.2011695118
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tresset, P., & Leymarie, FF (2013). Portrait drawing by Paul the robot. Computers & Graphics, 37(5), 348–363.10.1016/j.cag.2013.01.012
]Search in Google Scholar
[
U.N. and I.F.R.R. (2002). United Nations and The International Federation of Robotics. World Robotics 2002. New York–Geneva: United Nations.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ventura, D. (2016, June). Mere generation: Essential barometer or dated concept. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Computational Creativity (pp. 17-24). Paris: Sony CSL.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Weinberg, G., Driscoll, S., & Parry, M. (2005, August). Musical interactions with a perceptual robotic percussionist. In ROMAN 2005. IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005 (pp. 456-461). IEEE.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zagoruyko, S., & Komodakis, N. (2015). Learning to compare image patches via convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (pp. 4353-4361).10.1109/CVPR.2015.7299064
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zlatev, J. (2001). The epigenesis of meaning in human beings, and possibly in robots. Minds and Machines, 11, 155–195.10.1023/A:1011218919464
]Search in Google Scholar