Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human-Robot Interaction and User Manipulation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Persuasive Technology (PERSUASIVE 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13213))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The analysis presented is focused on the interaction among social robots and humans. It is here stated that, despite the multidisciplinary debate around the theme, social robots have to be ontologically deemed objects. The pleasant design and the simulation of intelligence, as much as social and emotional competences, are useful to convey acceptability and to favour interaction. However, they may lead to forms of manipulation which can impact the users’ will and undermine their physical and psychological integrity. This rises the need of a legal framework, able to guarantee a really human-centred development of new technologies and to ensure the protection of people involved in the interaction. Therefore, the recent European proposal of regulation, the Artificial Intelligence Act, is examined. In particular, the section on prohibited practices is critically analysed, so as to highlight the controversial aspects of such an approach. Thus, it is suggested the role of human dignity as a balancing principle to address the issues related to user manipulation in the human-robot interaction domain.

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 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
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. Riva, G., Riva, E.: CARESSES: the world’s first culturally sensitive robots for elderly care. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 22, 430 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Epley, N., Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J.T.: On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychol. Rev. 114, 864 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bryson, J.J.: Robots should be slaves. Close Engagements Artif. Companions Key Soc. Psychol. Ethical Des. Issues 8, 63–74 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. European Commission: Building Trust in Human-Centric Artificial Intelligence. COM (2019) 168 final. European Commission (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Calo, R.: Robotics and the Lessons of Cyberlaw. Calif. Law Rev. 103, 513–563 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Suchman, L.: Subject objects. Fem. Theory 12, 119–145 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Agar, N.: How to treat machines that might have minds. Philos. Technol. 33, 269–282 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Danaher, J.: Welcoming robots into the moral circle: a defence of ethical behaviourism. Sci. Eng. Ethics 26, 2023–2049 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gutman, M., Rathgeber, B., Syed, T.: Action and Autonomy: A hidden Dilemma in Artificial Autonomous Systems. In: Decker, M., Gutman, M. (eds.) Robo- and Informationethics. Some Fundamentals, pp. 231–256. Lit, Zürich (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gutmann, M., Rathgeber, B., Syed, T.: Organic Computing: Metaphor or Model? In: Müller-Schloer, C., Schmeck, H., Ungerer, T. (eds.) Organic Computing—A Paradigm Shift for Complex Systems, pp. 111–125. Springer Basel, Basel (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-0130-0_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Lotto, B., Cardilli, L.M., Olivero, G.: Percezioni: come il cervello costruisce il mondo. Bollati Boringhieri (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Floreano, D., Keller, L.: Evolution of adaptive behaviour in robots by means of Darwinian selection. PLoS Biol. 8, e1000292 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Moriarty, D.E., Schultz, A.C., Grefenstette, J.J.: Algorithms for reinforcement learning. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 11, 199 (1999)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Matthias, A.: The responsibility gap: ascribing responsibility for the actions of learning automata. Ethics Inf. Technol. 6, 175–183 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Matthias, A.: From coder to creator. Responsibility issues in intelligent artifact design. In: Luppicini, R., Adell, R. (eds.) Handbook of Research in Technoethics, vol. Handbook of Research in Technoethics. Hersher (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  16. De Jong, R.: The retribution-gap and responsibility-loci related to robots and automated technologies: a reply to nyholm. Sci. Eng. Ethics 26, 727–735 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bertolini, A.: Robots as products: the case for a realistic analysis of robotic applications and liability rules. Law Innov. Technol. 5, 214–247 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Walter, W.G.: An imitation of life. Sci. Am. 182, 42–45 (1950)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Martin, C.D.: The myth of the awesome thinking machine. Commun. ACM 36, 120–133 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kemeny, J.G.: Man viewed as a machine. Sci. Am. 192, 58–67 (1955)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Floridi, L.: Artificial intelligence’s new frontier: artificial companions and the fourth revolution. Metaphilosophy 39, 651–655 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Turing, A.: Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 49, 433–460 (1950)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Falcone, R., Capirci, O., Lucidi, F., Zoccolotti, P.: Prospettive di intelligenza artificiale: mente, lavoro e società nel mondo del machine learning. G. Ital. Psicol. 45, 43–68 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Warwick, K., Shah, H.: Can machines think? A report on Turing test experiments at the royal society. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 28, 1–11 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Bartha, P.: Analogy and analogical reasoning (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gieryn, T.F.: Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. Am. Soc. Rev. 48(6), 781–795 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Glocker, M.L., Langleben, D.D., Ruparel, K., Loughead, J.W., Gur, R.C., Sachser, N.: Baby schema in infant faces induces cuteness perception and motivation for caretaking in adults. Ethology 115, 257–263 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gn, J.: A lovable metaphor: on the affect, language and design of ‘cute.’ East Asian J. Popular Culture 2, 49–61 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lacey, C., Caudwell, C.: Cuteness as a ‘dark pattern’ in home robots. In: 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pp. 374–381. IEEE, (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nass, C., Moon, Y.: Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. J. Soc. Issues 56, 81–103 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Alley, T.R.: Infantile head shape as an elicitor of adult protection. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982) 411–427 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hildebrandt, K.A., Fitzgerald, H.E.: Facial feature determinants of perceived infant attractiveness. Infant Behav. Dev. 2, 329–339 (1979)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Seltzer, M.: Bodies and Machines (Routledge Revivals). Routledge (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Horstmann, A.C., Bock, N., Linhuber, E., Szczuka, J.M., Straßmann, C., Krämer, N.C.: Do a robot’s social skills and its objection discourage interactants from switching the robot off? PLoS ONE 13, e0201581 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Bartneck, C., Forlizzi, J.: Shaping human-robot interaction: understanding the social aspects of intelligent robotic products. In: CHI 2004 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1731–1732 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Damiano, L., Dumouchel, P.G.: Emotions in Relation. Epistemological and Ethical Scaffolding for Mixed Human-Robot Social Ecologies. HUMANA. MENTE J. Philos. Stud. 13(37), 181–206 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sparrow, R., Sparrow, L.: In the hands of machines? The future of aged care. Mind. Mach. 16, 141–161 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Di Dio, C., et al.: Shall i trust you? From child–robot interaction to trusting relationships. Front. Psychol. 11, 469 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hanoch, Y., Arvizzigno, F., Hernandez García, D., Denham, S., Belpaeme, T., Gummerum, M.: The robot made me do it: human-robot interaction and risk-taking behavior. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 24, 337–342 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Gillath, O., Ai, T., Branicky, M.S., Keshmiri, S., Davison, R.B., Spaulding, R.: Attachment and trust in artificial intelligence. Comput. Hum. Behav. 115, 106607 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Chemero, A.: Radical Embodied Cognitive Science. MIT press, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Breazeal, C.: JIBO, the world’s first social robot for the home [Internet]. Indiegogo (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lacey, C., Caudwell, C.B.: The robotic archetype: character animation and social robotics. In: Ge, S., et al. (eds) Social Robotics. ICSR 2018. LNCS, vol. 11357. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_3

  44. Van Camp, J.: Review: JIBO social robot. Wired 11, 17 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Mara, M., Appel, M.: Effects of lateral head tilt on user perceptions of humanoid and android robots. Comput. Hum. Behav. 44, 326–334 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Caudwell, C., Lacey, C., Sandoval, E.B.: The (Ir) relevance of robot cuteness: an exploratory study of emotionally durable robot design. In: Proceedings of the 31st Australian Conference on Human-Computer-Interaction, pp. 64–72 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hodson, H.: The first family robot. Elsevier (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Chapman, J.: Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences and Empathy. Routledge, London (2015)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  49. Bucher, T.: If\(..\) Then: Algorithmic Power and Politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Hoffman, G.: Anki, jibo, and kuri: what we can learn from social robots that didn’t make it. IEEE Spectrum (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Breazeal, C.: Grand Challenges of Building Sociable Robots (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Solon, O.: There is no point making robots look and act like humans. Wired UK NA (2011). https://www.wired.co.uk/article/humanoid-robots

  53. Ebrahimji, A.: In her dying days, a woman with coronavirus repeatedly talked to Alexa about her pain CNN (2020). https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/10/us/alexa-nursing-home-coronavirus-trnd/index.html

  54. Natale, S., Ballatore, A.: Imagining the thinking machine: technological myths and the rise of artificial intelligence. Convergence 26, 3–18 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Jung, C.G.: II libro rosso: liber novus. Bollati Boringhieri (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Guzman, A.L.: Imagining the voice in the machine: the ontology of digital social agents. University of Illinois at Chicago (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Guzman, A.L., Lewis, S.C.: Artificial intelligence and communication: a human-machine communication research agenda. New Media Soc. 22, 70–86 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Chattaraman, V., Kwon, W.-S., Gilbert, J.E., Ross, K.: Should AI-based, conversational digital assistants employ social-or task-oriented interaction style? A task-competency and reciprocity perspective for older adults. Comput. Hum. Behav. 90, 315–330 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Natale, S.: To believe in Siri: a critical analysis of AI voice assistants (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Humphry, J., Chesher, C.: Preparing for smart voice assistants: cultural histories and media innovations. New Media Soc. 23, 1971–1988 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wilks, Y.: Artificial Intelligence: Modern Magic or Dangerous Future? Icon Books (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Wagner, B.: Ethics as an escape from regulation. From “ethics-washing” to ethics-shopping? Being Profiled, pp. 84–89. Amsterdam University Press (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Sacco, R.: Legal formants: a dynamic approach to comparative law. Am. J. Comp. Law I 39(2), 343–401 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. European Commission: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain union legislative acts. COM/2021/206 final. European Commission (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Sax, M.: Between empowerment and manipulation: the ethics and regulation of for-profit health apps. Kluwer Law International BV (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Coeckelbergh, M.: Artificial companions: empathy and vulnerability mirroring in human-robot relations. Stud. Ethics, law, Technol. 4(3), (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Gandy, O.H.: Coming to Terms With Chance: Engaging Rational Discrimination And Cumulative Disadvantage. Routledge, London (2016)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  68. Turkle, S.: Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Basic Books, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Harris, I., Jennings, R.C., Pullinger, D., Rogerson, S., Duquenoy, P.: Ethical assessment of new technologies: a meta‐methodology. J. Inf., Commun. Ethics Soc. (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  70. O’Mahony, C.: There is no such thing as a right to dignity. Int. J. Const. Law 10, 551–574 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Dreier, H.: Die „guten Sitten“ zwischen Normativität und Faktizität. In: Harrer, F., Honsell, H., Mader, P. (eds.) Gedächtnisschrift für Theo Mayer-Maly, pp. 141–158. Springer Vienna, Vienna (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-0001-1_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  72. Gros, M.: Il principio di precauzione dinnanzi al giudice amministrativo francese. Il principio di precauzione dinnanzi al giudice amministrativo francese, pp. 709–758 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Bertolini, A.: Human-robot interaction and deception. Osservatorio del diritto civile e commerciale, Rivista semestrale 7(2), 645–659 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Fabre-Magnan, M.: La dignité en droit: un axiome. Revue interdisciplinaire d’études juridiques 58, 1–30 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Kretzmer, D., Klein, E.: The Concept of Human Dignity in Human Rights Discourse. Kluwer Law International The Hague (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  76. Kolakowski, L.: What is left of Socialism. First Things: A Monthly J. Religion Public Life 42–47 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Andrea Bertolini primarily contributed to Sects. 1, 2, 3, 6, 6.1, 7.

Rachele Carli primarily contributed to Sects. 1, 4, 5, 6, 6.2, 7.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DIRPOLIS Institute and EURA (European Centre of Excellence on the Regulation of Robotics & AI), Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Pisa, Italy

    Andrea Bertolini

  2. Alma Mater Research Institute for Human-Centered AI, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Rachele Carli

  3. ICR Group, AI RoboLab, University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

    Rachele Carli

Authors
  1. Andrea Bertolini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rachele Carli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Bertolini .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand

    Nilufar Baghaei

  2. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Julita Vassileva

  3. Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha, Qatar

    Raian Ali

  4. University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    Kiemute Oyibo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Bertolini, A., Carli, R. (2022). Human-Robot Interaction and User Manipulation. In: Baghaei, N., Vassileva, J., Ali, R., Oyibo, K. (eds) Persuasive Technology. PERSUASIVE 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13213. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98438-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98438-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-98437-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-98438-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation