abstract

Attitudes, Prior Interaction, and Petitioner Credibility Predict Support for Considering the Rights of Robots

Authors:

Patric R. Spence,

Autumn Edwards,

Chad EdwardsAuthors Info & Claims

HRI '18: Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Pages 243 - 244

https://doi.org/10.1145/3173386.3177071

Published: 01 March 2018 Publication History

Get Access

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine levels of support for consideration of the rights of robots and to identify predictors of support for robot rights. Findings demonstrated that negative attitudes toward robots, perceived credibility of the petitioner, and prior interaction with robots were significant predictors of individuals agreeing to sign a petition on the issue of robot rights. Gender of the participant and whether the petitioner was a human being or Pepper robot did not significantly predict willingness to sign the petition.

References

[1]

Gunkel, D. J. (2014). A vindication of the rights of machines. Philosophy & Technology, 27(1), 113--132.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[2]

Coeckelbergh, M. (2010). Robot rights? Towards a social-relational justification of moral consideration. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(3), 209--221.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[3]

Blake, R. R., Mouton, J. S., & Hain, J. D. (1956). Social forces in petition-signing. The Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, 385--390.

Google Scholar

[4]

Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanigin's (Eds.) Digital media, youth, and credibility: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning (pp. 73--100). The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

Google Scholar

[5]

Nomura, T., Kanda, T., & Suzuki, T. (2006). Experimental investigation into influence of negative attitudes toward robots on human--robot interaction. Ai and Society, 20, 138--150.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[6]

Coffé, H., & Bolzendahl, C. (2010). Same game, different rules? Gender differences in political participation. Sex roles, 62, 318--333.

Google Scholar

[7]

Mellon, J., Gilman, H., Sjoberg, F., Peixoto, T. (2017, July). Gender and political mobilization online: Participation and policy success on a global petitioning platform. Ash Center Occasional Papers (T. Saich, Ed.). Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation. Harvard Kennedy School. http://ash.harvard.edu

Google Scholar

[8]

McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90--103.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[9]

Spence, P. R., Westerman, D., Edwards, C., & Edwards, A. (2014). Welcoming our robot overlords: Initial expectations about interaction with a robot. Communication Research Reports, 31, 272--280.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[10]

Edwards, C., Edwards, A., Spence, P. R., & Westerman, D. (2016). Initial interaction expectations with robots: testing the human-to-human interaction script. Communication Studies, 67, 227--238.

Crossref

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Ahmad KIqbal WEl-Hassan AQadir JBenhaddou DAyyash MAl-Fuqaha A(2024)Data-Driven Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Comprehensive ReviewIEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies10.1109/TLT.2023.331461017(12-31)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2023.3314610
Seaborn KFrank A(2022)What Pronouns for Pepper? A Critical Review of Gender/ing in ResearchProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3501996(1-15)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3501996
Owe ABaum SCoeckelbergh M(2022)Nonhuman Value: A Survey of the Intrinsic Valuation of Natural and Artificial Nonhuman EntitiesScience and Engineering Ethics10.1007/s11948-022-00388-z28:5Online publication date: 30-Aug-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00388-z
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Attitudes, Prior Interaction, and Petitioner Credibility Predict Support for Considering the Rights of Robots
1. Applied computing
  1. Law, social and behavioral sciences
2. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
  2. Interaction design
    1. Interaction design process and methods
      1. Scenario-based design

Recommendations

Robot Rights?: Let's Talk about Human Welfare Instead
AIES '20: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

The 'robot rights' debate, and its related question of 'robot responsibility', invokes some of the most polarized positions in AI ethics. While some advocate for granting robots rights on a par with human beings, others, in a stark opposition argue that ...
Anthropomorphism and Its Negative Attitudes, Sociability, Animacy, Agency, and Disturbance Requirements for Social Robots: A Pilot Study
Social Robotics
Abstract
A social robot that meets the acceptability requirements of the target end-users presents a significant challenge to robot designers. The design process is often iterative and requires continuous improvements and optimization over time. One key ...
Humans, Neanderthals, robots and rights
Abstract
Robots are becoming more visible parts of our life, a situation which prompts questions about their place in our society. One group of issues that is widely discussed is connected with robots’ moral and legal status as well as their potential ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

HRI '18: Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 2018

431 pages

ISBN:9781450356152

DOI:10.1145/3173386

General Chairs:
Takayuki Kanda
ATR, Japan
,
Selma Ŝabanović
Indiana University Bloomington, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Guy Hoffman
Cornell University, USA
,
Adriana Tapus
ENSTA-ParisTech, France

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 March 2018

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Abstract

Conference

HRI '18

Sponsor:

SIGAI
SIGCHI
IEEE-RAS

HRI '18: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 5 - 8, 2018

IL, Chicago, USA

Acceptance Rates

HRI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 49 of 206 submissions, 24%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 192 of 519 submissions, 37%

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

8
Total Citations
View Citations
208
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)9
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 05 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Ahmad KIqbal WEl-Hassan AQadir JBenhaddou DAyyash MAl-Fuqaha A(2024)Data-Driven Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Comprehensive ReviewIEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies10.1109/TLT.2023.331461017(12-31)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2023.3314610
Seaborn KFrank A(2022)What Pronouns for Pepper? A Critical Review of Gender/ing in ResearchProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3501996(1-15)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3501996
Owe ABaum SCoeckelbergh M(2022)Nonhuman Value: A Survey of the Intrinsic Valuation of Natural and Artificial Nonhuman EntitiesScience and Engineering Ethics10.1007/s11948-022-00388-z28:5Online publication date: 30-Aug-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00388-z
Martínez EWinter C(2021)Protecting Sentient Artificial Intelligence: A Survey of Lay Intuitions on Standing, Personhood, and General Legal ProtectionFrontiers in Robotics and AI10.3389/frobt.2021.7883558Online publication date: 26-Nov-2021
https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.788355
Harris JAnthis J(2021)The Moral Consideration of Artificial Entities: A Literature ReviewScience and Engineering Ethics10.1007/s11948-021-00331-827:4Online publication date: 9-Aug-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00331-8
Naneva SSarda Gou MWebb TPrescott T(2020)A Systematic Review of Attitudes, Anxiety, Acceptance, and Trust Towards Social RobotsInternational Journal of Social Robotics10.1007/s12369-020-00659-412:6(1179-1201)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00659-4
Craig MEdwards CEdwards ASpence P(2019)Impressions of Message Compliance-Gaining Strategies for Considering Robot Rights2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)10.1109/HRI.2019.8673117(560-561)Online publication date: Mar-2019
https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2019.8673117
Martínez EWinter C(undefined)Protecting Sentient AI: A Survey of Lay Intuitions on Standing, Personhood, and General Legal Protection of Sentient Artificial IntelligenceSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.3936654
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3936654

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Robot Rights?: Let's Talk about Human Welfare Instead

Anthropomorphism and Its Negative Attitudes, Sociability, Animacy, Agency, and Disturbance Requirements for Social Robots: A Pilot Study

Humans, Neanderthals, robots and rights

Comments

Published In

Sponsors

Publisher

Publication History

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Conference

Acceptance Rates

Other Metrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Cited By

Login options

Full Access

PDF

eReader

Abstract

References

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Robot Rights?: Let's Talk about Human Welfare Instead

Anthropomorphism and Its Negative Attitudes, Sociability, Animacy, Agency, and Disturbance Requirements for Social Robots: A Pilot Study

Humans, Neanderthals, robots and rights

Comments

Information

Published In

Sponsors

Publisher

Publication History

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Conference

Acceptance Rates

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

eReader

Figures

Other

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media

Affiliations