No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Autonomous social robots are real in the mind's eye of many
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 April 2023
Abstract
Clark and Fischer's dismissal of extant human–robot interaction research approaches limits opportunities to understand major variables shaping people's engagement with social robots. Instead, this endeavour categorically requires multidisciplinary approaches. We refute the assumption that people cannot (correctly or incorrectly) represent robots as autonomous social agents. This contradicts available empirical evidence, and will become increasingly tenuous as robot automation improves.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Caruana, N., & McArthur, G. (2019). The mind minds minds: The effect of intentional stance on the neural encoding of joint attention. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 19(6), 1479–1491. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-019-00734-yCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caruana, N., Moffat, R., Blanco, A. M., & Cross, E. S. (2022). Perceptions of intelligence & sentience shape children's interactions with robot reading companions: A mixed methods study. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7t2w9Google Scholar
Caruana, N., Spirou, D., & Brock, J. (2017). Human agency beliefs influence behaviour during virtual social interactions. PeerJ, 5, e3819. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3819CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cross, E. S., & Ramsey, R. (2021). Mind meets machine: Towards a cognitive science of human–machine interactions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(3), 200–212.10.1016/j.tics.2020.11.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cross, E. S., Ramsey, R., Liepelt, R., Prinz, W., & de C Hamilton, A. F. (2016). The shaping of social perception by stimulus and knowledge cues to human animacy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 371(1686), 20150075. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0075CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epley, N., Waytz, A., Akalis, S., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). When we need a human: Motivational determinants of anthropomorphism. Social Cognition, 26(2), 143–155. doi:10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, J. F. (1984). An iterative design methodology for user-friendly natural language office information applications. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 2(1), 26–41.10.1145/357417.357420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neave, N., Jackson, R., Saxton, T., & Hönekopp, J. (2015). The influence of anthropomorphic tendencies on human hoarding behaviours. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 214–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schellen, E., & Wykowska, A. (2019). Intentional mindset toward robots – Open questions and methodological challenges. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5, 139. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2018.00139CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
Social robots as depictions of social agents
Related commentaries (29)
A more ecological perspective on human–robot interactions
A neurocognitive view on the depiction of social robots
Anthropomorphism, not depiction, explains interaction with social robots
Autonomous social robots are real in the mind's eye of many
Binding paradox in artificial social realities
Children's interactions with virtual assistants: Moving beyond depictions of social agents
Cues trigger depiction schemas for robots, as they do for human identities
Dancing robots: Social interactions are performed, not depicted
Depiction as possible phase in the dynamics of sociomorphing
Fictional emotions and emotional reactions to social robots as depictions of social agents
How cultural framing can bias our beliefs about robots and artificial intelligence
How deep is AI's love? Understanding relational AI
How puzzling is the social artifact puzzle?
Interacting with characters redux
Meta-cognition about social robots could be difficult, making self-reports about some cognitive processes less useful
Of children and social robots
On the potentials of interaction breakdowns for HRI
People treat social robots as real social agents
Social robots and the intentional stance
Social robots as social learning partners: Exploring children's early understanding and learning from social robots
Taking a strong interactional stance
The Dorian Gray Refutation
The now and future of social robots as depictions
The second-order problem of other minds
Trait attribution explains human–robot interactions
Unpredictable robots elicit responsibility attributions
Virtual and real: Symbolic and natural experiences with social robots
When Pinocchio becomes a real boy: Capability and felicity in AI and interactive depictions
“Who's there?”: Depicting identity in interaction
Author response
On depicting social agents