## 3 Results and Discussion  
The flow diagram of the PRISMA Statement methodology is presented in Figure 1[2; 22]. A total of 3759 records were obtained (after removing 1537 duplicates). After the application of eligibility criteria for the first phase, 2518 articles were excluded by not being related to cobots and 136 were excluded by not mentioning UX goals. From the 105 articles that \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Keywords** & **Synonyms** \\ \hline Aim & Purpose \\ Objective & Target \\  & Intention \\  & Ambition \\  & Requirement \\  & Need /necessity \\  & Outcome \\  & Effect \\  & Value \\  & Task \\  & Accomplishment \\ Goal & Safety \\  & Trust \\  & Fellowship \\  & Sympathy \\  & Inspiration \\  & Satisfying \\  & Enpayable \\  & Fun \\  & Entertaining \\  & Helpful \\  & Motivating \\  & Aesthetically pleasing \\  & Supportive of creativity \\  & Rewarding \\  & Emotionally fulfilling \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: _Cont._transitioned, all of them were actually developed in an industrial context, so the exclusion factor ended up being the article's allusion to the scope of cobots and UX goals. In the end, seven studies were included to be analyzed in this review. The first selected paper was published in 2015, followed by a two-year gap. After that, there was a slight increase in publications about the topic under study, with four articles being published in 2020 (see Figure 2). There were six conference papers included and one article, all of which provided insights related to how the design of cobots can be enhanced. Two of the studies were carried out in Finland, and the others in, Spain, Italy, Germany, Turkey, and the United States of America. These studies focused on a variety of topics, namely industry 4.0 e.g., [37], collaborative robots e.g., [38], human-robot collaboration e.g., [39], user experience, experience-driven design, and UX goals (e.g., [16]). Additionally, other topics were explored, namely, but  
Figure 1: PRISMA Statement flow diagram [2,22]. Figure 2: Number of publications throughout the years. not exclusively, task planning [37], barriers and development needs [38], virtual reality, augmented communication, and artificial intelligence [39], technology adoption and social cues [40], robot motion and animation principles [41], and safety [42]. The samples studied were quite diverse. On the one hand, they included students [6; 39; 41; 42], as well as researchers and scientists [16; 38]), representing academia. On the other hand, industry was represented by several industrial professionals, from management and supervision [27; 40] to different operational roles [6; 37; 38; 40; 42], and even end-users [38]. The sample size ranged from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 140 participants (see Table 2). Regarding the study design, one paper used quantitative methods [38], three used qualitative ones [39; 40; 42], and three followed a mixed-method approach [6; 37; 41]. Data collection was conducted in various ways, the most frequent ones being questionnaires and semi-structured interviews (see Table 2). Five of the seven studies performed experiences with actual cobots, two of which were conducted in real industrial settings (see Table 2). Another study used a virtual reality setting to perform its experiments. Some of the robotic devices were the Kuka robot [39], the Franka Panda cobot ([16]), the Universal Robot [37; 41], and the Baxter robot [40]. The experience of users is increasingly being considered when designing technological devices [26], highlighting a human-centric perspective, which is central to the industry 5.0 paradigm [14]. This experience-driven design is enabled by the definition and application of UX goals, that guide the whole process [21]. In this systematic literature review, we