Advertisement

AI & SOCIETY

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 483–489 | Cite as

What is it like to encounter an autonomous artificial agent?

  • Karsten WeberEmail author
25TH ANNIVERSARY VOLUME A FAUSTIAN EXCHANGE: WHAT IS IT TO BE HUMAN IN THE ERA OF UBIQUITOUS TECHNOLOGY?

Abstract

Following up on Thomas Nagel’s paper “What is it like to be a bat?” and Alan Turing’s essay “Computing machinery and intelligence,” it shall be claimed that a successful interaction of human beings and autonomous artificial agents depends more on which characteristics human beings ascribe to the agent than on whether the agent really has those characteristics. It will be argued that Masahiro Mori’s concept of the “uncanny valley” as well as evidence from several empirical studies supports that assertion. Finally, some tentative conclusions concerning moral implications of the arguments presented here shall be drawn.

Keywords

Autonomous artificial agent Turing test Uncanny valley Moral responsibility 

References

  1. Breazeal C (2001) Affective interaction between humans and robots. Adv Artif Life LNCS 2159:582–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Breazeal C, Brooks R (2004) Robot emotions: a functional perspective. In: Fellous J, Arbib M (eds) Who needs emotions?. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 271–310Google Scholar
  3. Castellano G, Peters Chr (2010) Socially perceptive robots: challenges and concerns. Interact Stud 11:201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coeckelbergh M (2011) Humans, animals, and robots: a phenomenological approach to human-robot relations. Int J Soc Robot 3:197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Draude CL (2011) Intermediaries: reflections on virtual humans, gender, and the uncanny valley. AI Soc 26:319–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Friedman B, Kahn PH Jr (1992) Human agency and responsible computing: implications for Computer System Design. J Syst Softw 17:7–14Google Scholar
  7. Isbister K, Doyle P (2005) The blind men and the elephant revisited. In: Ruttkay Zs, Pelachaud C (eds) From brows to trust: evaluating embodied conversational agents. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 3–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ishiguro H, Nishio Sh (2007) Building artificial humans to understand humans. J Artif Organs 10:133–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kidd CD, Taggart W, Turkle S (2006) A sociable robot to encourage social interaction among the elderly. Proceedings 2006 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 3972–3976Google Scholar
  10. Koda T, Ishida T, Rehm M, André E (2009) Avatar culture: cross-cultural evaluations of avatar facial expressions. AI Soc 24:237–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li D, Rau P, Li Y (2010) A cross-cultural study: effect of robot appearance and task. Int J Soc Robot 2:175–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. MacDorman K, Vasudevan S, Ho Ch–Ch (2009) Does Japan really have robot mania? Comparing attitudes by implicit and explicit measures. AI Soc 23:485–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Misselhorn C (2009) Empathy with inanimate objects and the uncanny valley. Mind Mach 19:345–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mori M (1970) The uncanny valley. Energy 7:33–35Google Scholar
  15. Nagel Th (1974) What is it like to be a bat? Philos Rev 83:435–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rickenberg R, Reeves B (2000) The effects of animated characters on anxiety, task performance, and evaluations of user interfaces. Proceedings of the SIGCHI’00 conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, pp 49–56Google Scholar
  17. Sharkey N, Sharkey A (2010) The crying shame of robot nannies: an ethical appraisal. Interact Stud 11:161–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Slater M, Antley A, Davison A, Swapp D, Guger Chr, Barker Chr, Pistrang N, Sanchez-Vives MV (2006) A virtual reprise of the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments. PLoS ONE 1:e39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stiehl WD, Breazeal C (2005) Affective touch for robotic companions. Affect Comput Intell Interact LNCS 3784:747–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Taggart W, Turkle S, Kidd CD (2005) An interactive robot in a nursing home: preliminary remarks. Toward social mechanisms of android science. Cognitive Science Society, Stresa/Italy, pp 56–61Google Scholar
  21. Turing AM (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 54:433–457MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Walters M, Syrdal D, Dautenhahn K, te Boekhorst R, Koay Kh (2008) Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion. Auton Robots 24:159–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty 1Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Computer ScienceCottbusGermany

Personalised recommendations