Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Robots Are Moral Actors: Unpacking Current Moral HRI Research Through a Moral Foundations Lens

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Social Robotics (ICSR 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 12483))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Even with the increasing frequency of robot experiences in our daily lives, relatively little research has been done to explore the moral implications of these human-robot interactions (HRI). Of the existing moral HRI research, much of it assumes a moral dimension without clearly defining what moral framework is being applied. To research such a framework, it is crucial to evaluate current research for a communicable moral framework, that is also in dialogue with key moral frameworks in social science spaces. This work uses a narrative literature review to analyze moral HRI research through the lens of the Moral Foundations Theory. The analysis will situate moral HRI work in the seminal moral theory within social science spaces and show where current gaps in HRI research might exist. Evaluating research through the lens of the moral foundations theory framework will strengthen the existence of a ‘Moral HRI’ field that is related but distinct from general HRI.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
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

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Agrawal, S., Williams, M.A.: Robot authority and human obedience. In: Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038387

  2. Asaro, P.: “hands up, don’t shoot!” HRI and the automation of police use of force. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 5(3), 55 (2016). https://doi.org/10.5898/jhri.5.3.asaro

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Breazael, C., Scassellati, B.: Infant-like social interactions between a robot and a human caregiver (2006). https://doi.org/10.21236/ada450357

  4. Briggs, G., Gessell, B., Dunlap, M., Scheutz, M.: Actions speak louder than looks: does robot appearance affect human reactions to robot protest and distress? The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/roman.2014.6926402

  5. van den Brule, R., Dotsch, R., Bijlstra, G., Wigboldus, D.H.J., Haselager, P.: Do robot performance and behavioral style affect human trust? Int. J. Soc. Robot. 6(4), 519–531 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0231-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chaminade, T., et al.: Brain response to a humanoid robot in areas implicated in the perception of human emotional gestures. PLoS One 5(7), e11577 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cormier, D., Newman, G., Nakane, M., Young, J.E., Durocher, S.: Would you do as a robot commands? an obedience study for human-robot interaction. In: International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Danaher, J.: Robot Betrayal: a guide to the ethics of robotic deception. Ethics Inf. Technol. 22(2), 117–128 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-019-09520-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Faria, D.R., Vieira, M., Faria, F.C., Premebida, C.: Affective facial expressions recognition for human-robot interaction. In: 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/roman.2017.8172395

  10. Gombolay, M., Gutierrez, R., Sturla, G., Shah, J.: Decision-making authority, team efficiency and human worker satisfaction in mixed human-robot teams. Robot.: Sci. Syst. X (2014). https://doi.org/10.15607/rss.2014.x.046

  11. Graham, J., Haidt, J., Nosek, B.A.: Moral foundations dictionary. PsycTESTS Dataset (2009). https://doi.org/10.1037/t48554-000

  12. Groom, V., Chen, J., Johnson, T., Kara, F.A., Nass, C.: Critic, compatriot, or chump? In: Proceeding of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI 10 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1145/1734454.1734545

  13. Groom, V., Nass, C.: Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human-robot teams. Interact. Stud. 8(3), 483–500 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Haring, K., Nye, K., Darby, R., Phillips, E., de Visser, E., Tossell, C.: I’m not playing anymore! a study comparing perceptions of robot and human cheating behavior. In: Salichs, M.A., Ge, S.S., Barakova, E.I., Cabibihan, J.-J., Wagner, A.R., Castro-González, Á., He, H. (eds.) ICSR 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11876, pp. 410–419. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35888-4_38

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Haring, K.S., Matsumoto, Y., Watanabe, K.: How do people perceive and trust a lifelike robot. In: Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 1 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hinds, P.J., Roberts, T.L., Jones, H.: Whose job is it anyway? A study of human-robot interaction in a collaborative task. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 19(1–2), 151–181 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jackson, R.B., Wen, R., Williams, T.: Tact in noncompliance. In: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314241

  18. Jackson, R.B., Williams, T.: Language-capable robots may inadvertently weaken human moral norms. In: 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/hri.2019.8673123

  19. Jackson, R.B., Williams, T., Smith, N.: Exploring the role of gender in perceptions of robotic noncompliance. In: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374831

  20. Litoiu, A., Ullman, D., Kim, J., Scassellati, B.: Evidence that robots trigger a cheating detector in humans. In: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI 2015 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696456

  21. Malle, B.F., Scheutz, M., Arnold, T., Voiklis, J., Cusimano, C.: Sacrifice one for the good of many? In: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI 2015 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696458

  22. Malle, B.F., Scheutz, M., Forlizzi, J., Voiklis, J.: Which robot am i thinking about? The impact of action and appearance on peoples evaluations of a moral robot. In: 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/hri.2016.7451743

  23. Mathur, M.B., Reichling, D.B.: Navigating a social world with robot partners: a quantitative cartography of the uncanny valley. Cognition 146, 22–32 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Nadel, J., et al.: Human responses to an expressive robot. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Epigenetic Robotics. Lund University (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Nakad, H.H., Herik, H.J.V.D., Jongbloed, A.T., Salem, A.B.M.: The rise of the robotic judge in modern court proceedings. In: The 7th International Conference on Information Technology (2015). https://doi.org/10.15849/icit.2015.0009

  26. Petisca, S., Esteves, F., Paiva, A.: Cheating with robots: how at ease do they make us feel? In: 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/iros40897.2019.8967790

  27. Robinette, P., Howard, A.M., Wagner, A.R.: Effect of robot performance on human-robot trust in time-critical situations. IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 47(4), 425–436 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/thms.2017.2648849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Robinette, P., Li, W., Allen, R., Howard, A.M., Wagner, A.R.: Overtrust of robots in emergency evacuation scenarios. In: 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/hri.2016.7451740

  29. Satterfield, K., et al.: Robot knows best? A comparison of compliance with human and robotic coaches. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annual Meeting 63(1), 406–407 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181319631412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Short, E., Hart, J., Vu, M., Scassellati, B.: No fair!! In: Proceeding of the 5th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction - HRI 2010 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1145/1734454.1734546

  31. Sourdin, T.: Judge v robot: the rise of machines is upon Uss. SSRN Electron. J. (2017). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3040402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ullman, D., Leite, L., Phillips, J., Kim-Cohen, J., Scassellati, B.: Smart human, smarter robot: How cheating affects perceptions of social agency. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, vol. 36 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Xu, J., Bryant, D.G., Howard, A.: Would you trust a robot therapist? Validating the equivalency of trust in human-robot healthcare scenarios. In: 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/roman.2018.8525782

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Denver, Denver, CO, 80203, USA

    Dylan Doyle-Burke & Kerstin S. Haring

Authors
  1. Dylan Doyle-Burke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kerstin S. Haring
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Dylan Doyle-Burke or Kerstin S. Haring .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Alan R. Wagner

  2. University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV, USA

    David Feil-Seifer

  3. University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA

    Kerstin S. Haring

  4. University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy

    Silvia Rossi

  5. Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA

    Thomas Williams

  6. Wichita State University, Wichita, KS, USA

    Hongsheng He

  7. National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

    Shuzhi Sam Ge

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Doyle-Burke, D., Haring, K.S. (2020). Robots Are Moral Actors: Unpacking Current Moral HRI Research Through a Moral Foundations Lens. In: Wagner, A.R., et al. Social Robotics. ICSR 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12483. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-62055-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-62056-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation