Why Collaborative Robots Must Be Social (and even Emotional) Actors

Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 23 (3):270-289 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this article, I address the question whether or not robots should be social actors and suggest that we do not have much choice but to construe collaborative robots as social actors. Social cues, including emotional displays, serve coordination functions in human interaction and therefore have to be used, even by robots, in order for long-term collaboration to succeed. While robots lack the experiential basis of emotional display, also in human interaction much emotional expression is part of conventional social practice; if robots are to participate in such social practices, they need to produce such signals as well. I conclude that if we aim to share our social spaces with robots, they better be social actors, which may even include the display of emotions. This finding is of empirical as well as philosophical relevance because it shifts the ethical discussion away from the question, how social collaborative robots should be, to the question, what kinds of human-robot collaborations we want.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Why Collaborative Robots Must Be Social (and even Emotional) Actors.Kerstin Fischer - 2019 - Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 23 (3):270-289.
Personal Robots, Appearance, and Human Good.Mark Coeckelbergh - 2009 - International Journal of Social Robotics 1 (3):217-221.
Modeling the acceptance of socially interactive robotics: Social presence in human–robot interaction.Dong-Hee Shin & Hyungseung Choo - 2011 - Interaction Studiesinteraction Studies Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems 12 (3):430-460.
Can we trust robots?Mark Coeckelbergh - 2012 - Ethics and Information Technology 14 (1):53-60.
Measurement of negative attitudes toward robots.Tatsuya Nomura, Tomohiro Suzuki, Takayuki Kanda & Kensuke Kato - 2006 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 7 (3):437-454.
Should we be thinking about sex robots?John Danaher - 2017 - In John Danaher & Neil McArthur (eds.), Robot Sex: Social Implications and Ethical. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Robots, Autonomy, and Responsibility.Raul Hakli & Pekka Mäkelä - 2016 - In Johanna Seibt, Marco Nørskov & Søren Schack Andersen (eds.), What Social Robots Can and Should Do: Proceedings of Robophilosophy 2016. IOS Press. pp. 145-154.
Social cognition and social robots.Shaun Gallagher - 2007 - Pragmatics and Cognition 15 (3):435-453.
Are Emotional Robots Deceptive?Mark Coeckelbergh - 2012 - IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 3 (4):388-393.
Children’s acceptance of social robots.Chiara de Jong, Jochen Peter, Rinaldo Kühne & Alex Barco - 2019 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 20 (3):393-425.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-01-10

Downloads
25 (#616,937)

6 months
7 (#411,886)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references