Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Challenge of Being Self-Aware When Building Robots for Everyday Worlds

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Developing Support Technologies

Part of the book series: Biosystems & Biorobotics ((BIOSYSROB,volume 23))

  • 825 Accesses

Abstract

Building robots to serve the needs of everyday life is described as a twofold challenge. Firstly, robotics, engineering, and computer science need new theories and concepts. Secondly, new methods and forms of collaboration are required. The article argues that the “wicked” nature of everyday worlds implies another, seemingly mundane challenge for roboticists: to become more self-aware about their own actions (Sect. 1). This includes a critical reflection on the goals of research and development, when dealing with humans (Sect. 2). Furthermore, there are two kinds of rather implicit methods roboticists use to make their machine work in everyday worlds, that should be considered more explicitly: On the one hand, the researcher’s own everyday knowledge becomes an ambivalent resource for making decisions (Sect. 3.1). On the other hand, roboticists themselves often engage in creating expectations and desirable scenarios by staging robot behavior (Sect. 3.2). The article concludes not to wipe out these seemingly mundane practices, but rather to use their marginalization as a starting point for a reflective methodology of technical support systems (Sect. 4).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 205–224). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bischof, A. (2017). Soziale Maschinen bauen: Epistemische Praktiken der Sozialrobotik. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Böhle, K, & Bopp, K. (2014). What a vision: The artificial companion. A piece of vision assessment including an expert survey. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies (STI Studies), 10(1), 155–186.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Both, G. (2015). Youtubization of research. Enacting the high-tech cowboy in video demonstrations. In S. Davies, M. Horst, & E. Stengler (Eds.), Studying science communication (pp. 24–27). Bristol University of the West of England.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Courtney, J. F. (2008). Decision making and knowledge management in inquiring organisations: Toward a new decision-making paradigm for DSS. Decision Support Systems—Knowledge Management Support of Decision Making, 31(1), 17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dautenhahn, K. (1998). The art of designing socially intelligent agents: Science, fiction, and the human in the loop. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 12(7–8), 573–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. DeGrace, P., & Stahl, L. H. (1990). Wicked problems, righteous solutions: A catalog of modern engineering paradigms. Yourdon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dourish, P. (2006). Implications for design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 541–550). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Giesel, K. (2007). Leitbilder in den Sozialwissenschaften. Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Harrison, S., Tatar, D., & Sengers, P. (2007). The three paradigms of HCI. Alt. Chi. Session at the 2007 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–18). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Höflich, J. R. (2013). Relationships to social robots: Towards a triadic analysis of media-oriented behavior. Intervalla, 1, 35–48.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S. (2009). Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva, 47(2), 119–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Knorr Cetina, K. (1984). The fabrication of facts: Toward a microsociology of scientific knowledge. In M. Stehr (Eds.), Society and knowledge (pp. 223–244). Oxford: Transaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kroes, N. (2014). Lighting a SPARC under our competitive economy. Speech available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-421_en.htm.

  15. Latour, B., & Weibel, P. (Eds.). (2005). Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Leis, M. J. (2006). Robots–our future partners. A sociologist’s view from a German and Japanese perspective. Marburg: Tectum.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lindemann, G. (2016). Social interaction with robots: Three questions. AI & Society, 31(4), 573–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Meister, M. (2011). Soziale Koordination durch Boundary Objects am Beispiel des heterogenen Feldes der Servicerobotik. Doctoral Thesis, Fakultät Planen, Bauen, Umwelt, Technische Universität Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meister, M. (2014). When is a robot really social? An outline of the robot sociologicus. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies, 10(1), 107–134.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Nördinger, S. (2014). Zivilies Forschungsprogramm SPARC. EU-Komission startet weltweit größtes ziviles Robotik-Forschungsprogramm. http://sparc-robotics.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Produktion-Germany-EU-Komission-startet-weltweit-gr%C3%B6%C3%9Ftes-ziviles.pdf.

  21. Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Roelofsen, A., Broerse, J. E., de Cock Buning, T., & Bunders, J. (2008). Exploring the future of ecological genomics: Integrating CTA with vision assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(3), 334–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rosenthal, C. (2005). Making science and technology results public: A sociology of demos. In B. Latour & P. Weibel (Eds.), Making things public. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Šabanović, S. (2007). Imagine all the robots: Developing a critical practice of cultural and disciplinary traversals in social robotics. Doctoral Thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Suchman, L. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. Cambridge: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Suchman, L. (2011). Subject objects. Feminist Theory, 12(2), 119–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Suchman, L. (2014). Humanizing humanity. Blogpost: https://robotfutures.wordpress.com/2014/07/19/humanizing-humanity/.

  28. Turkle, S. (2017). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Hachette.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wagner, C. (2014). Techno-imaginations and robot role models: Discussing the influence of popular culture on the development of next generation robots in Japan. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Universal Village, June 16–17, 2014, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Weeks, J. (2006). Lay ethnography and unpopular culture. Working Paper 2006/47/OB, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Winthereik, B., Ross, N., & Strand, D. L. (2008). Making technology public: Challenging the notion of script through an e-health demonstration video. Information Technology & People, 21(2), 116–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121–136.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38(1), 58–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Junior Research Group “Miteinander”, Media Informatics, University of Technology Chemnitz, Straße der Nationen 62, 09111, Chemnitz, Germany

    Andreas Bischof

Authors
  1. Andreas Bischof
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Bischof .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Manufacturing Technology, Helmut Schmidt University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Athanasios Karafillidis

  2. Laboratory of Manufacturing Technology, Helmut Schmidt University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Robert Weidner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bischof, A. (2018). The Challenge of Being Self-Aware When Building Robots for Everyday Worlds. In: Karafillidis, A., Weidner, R. (eds) Developing Support Technologies. Biosystems & Biorobotics, vol 23. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01836-8_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01836-8_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01835-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01836-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation