Abstract
This position paper proposes a novel approach to the ethical design of social robots. We coin the term “Virtuous Robotics” to describe Human–Robot Interaction (HRI) designed to help humans reach a higher level of moral development. Our approach contrasts with mainstream approaches to robot design inspired by the other normative theories, Consequentialism and Deontology. In the paper we theoretically justify our proposal, illustrating how the Virtuous Robotics approach allows us to discriminate between positive and negative applications of robotics systems, of which we provide examples. From an ethical perspective, our proposal is theoretically robust because it is based on the assistive role played by the robot rather than the robot’s moral agency. From a designer’s perspective, Virtuous Robotics is technically feasible because it transfers the cognitive burden of HRI from the robot to the user, bypassing the need for complex decision-making abilities. From the user’s perspective, it is concretely advantageous, because it envisions a realistic way to make robots morally desirable in our lives, as supports for personal betterment and fulfilment.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackerman E (2018) Robotic tortoise helps kids to learn that robot abuse is a bad thing—IEEE Spectrum. Library Catalog: spectrum.ieee.org. https://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/robotics-hardware/shelly-robotic-tortoise-helps-kids-learn-that-robot-abuse-is-a-bad-thing
Addison A, Bartneck C, Yogeeswaran K (2019) Robots can be more than Black and White: examining racial bias towards robots. In: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM conference on AI, ethics, and society. ACM, pp 493–498
Albright G, Goldman R, Shockley KM, McDevitt F, Akabas S (2012) Using an avatar-based simulation to train families to motivate veterans with post-deployment stress to seek help at the va. Games Health: Res Dev Clin Appl 1(1):21–28
Anderson SL (2008) Asimovs three laws of robotics and machine metaethics. AI Soc 22(4):477–493
Aroyo A, Kyohei T, Koyama T, Takahashi H, Rea F, Sciutti A, Yoshikawa Y, Ishiguro H, Sandini G (2018) Will people morally crack under the authority of a famous wicked robot? In: 2018 27th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525744. ISSN: 1944-9437
author N. Selected RoboticLab projects | iCampus Wildau. https://icampus.th-wildau.de/icampus/home/en/selected-roboticlab-projects-0
author N. This Little Robot Will Teach You Yoga | Digital Trends. https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/alpha-2-robot-crowdfunding-news/
Bacchus F, Kabanza F (2000) Using temporal logics to express search control knowledge for planning. Artif Intell 116(1–2):123–191
Bartlett RC, Collins SD et al (2011) Aristotle’s Nicomachean ethics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Bartneck C, Yogeeswaran K, Ser QM, Woodward G, Sparrow R, Wang S, Eyssel F (2018) Robots and racism. In: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, HRI ’18. Association for Computing Machinery, Chicago, pp 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171260
Bassett C (2019) The computational therapeutic: exploring Weizenbaums ELIZA as a history of the present. AI Soc 34(4):803–812
Borenstein J, Arkin RC (2017) Nudging for good: robots and the ethical appropriateness of nurturing empathy and charitable behavior. AI Soc 32(4):499–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-016-0684-1
Briggs G (2012) Machine ethics, the frame problem, and theory of mind. In: Proceedings of the AISB/IACAP world congress
Bryson J.J (2010) Robots should be slaves. In: Close engagements with artificial companions: key social, psychological, ethical and design issues, pp 63–74
Bryson JJ (2010) Why robot nannies probably wont do much psychological damage. Interact Stud 11(2):196–200. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.11.2.03bry
Burton E, Goldsmith J, Koenig S, Kuipers B, Mattei N, Walsh T (2017) Ethical considerations in artificial intelligence courses. AI Mag 38(2):22–34. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v38i2.2731
Calo CJ, Hunt-Bull N, Lewis L, Metzler T (2011) Ethical implications of using the paro robot, with a focus on dementia patient care. In: Workshops at the twenty-fifth AAAI conference on artificial intelligence
Cappuccio M, Wheeler M (2011) The sign of the hand: symbolic practices and the extended mind. Versus 113:33–56
Cappuccio M, Wheeler M (2012) Ground-level intelligence: inter-context frame problem and dynamics of the background. In: Knowing without thinking. Mind, action, cognition and the phenomenon of the background. Palgrave Macmillan, London
Cappuccio ML, Peeters A, McDonald W (2019) Sympathy for Dolores: moral consideration for robots based on virtue and recognition. Philos Technol 1–23
Chartrand TL, Bargh JA (1999) The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. J Personal Soc Psychol 76(6):893
Dautenhahn K, Woods S, Kaouri C, Walters M, Koay KL, Werry I (2005) What is a robot companion—friend, assistant or butler? In: 2005 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1192–1197. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2005.1545189. ISSN: 2153-0866
Deng B (2015) Machine ethics: the robot’s dilemma. Nat News 523(7558):24
Draper H, Sorell T (2014) Using robots to modify demanding or impolite behavior of older people. In: Beetz M, Johnston B, Williams MA (eds) Social robotics. Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Cham, pp 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11973-1_13
Eyssel F, Hegel F (2012) (S)he’s got the look: gender stereotyping of robots. J Appl Soc Psychol 42(9):2213–2230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00937.x
Fasola J, Matari MJ (2013) A socially assistive robot exercise coach for the elderly. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.2.2.Fasola
Forlizzi J, Saensuksopa T, Salaets N, Shomin M, Mericli T, Hoffman G (2016) Let’s be honest: a controlled field study of ethical behavior in the presence of a robot. In: 2016 25th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 769–774. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745206. ISSN: 1944-9437
Freedman R, Borg J.S, Sinnott-Armstrong W, Dickerson J.P, Conitzer V (2020) Adapting a kidney exchange algorithm to align with human values. Artif Intell, p 103261
Ghaffary S (2018) Is this robot really going to replace a security guard? https://www.vox.com/2018/10/8/17913420/security-robot-cobalt-robotics-knightscope-slack-yelp
Ghazali AS, Ham J, Barakova EI, Markopoulos P (2017) Pardon the rude robot: social cues diminish reactance to high controlling language. In: 2017 26th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 411–417. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172335. ISSN: 1944-9437
Goetz J, Kiesler S, Powers A (2003) Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation. In: Proceedings on the 12th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, 2003, ROMAN 2003. IEEE, pp 55–60
Graham G et al (2004) Eight theories of ethics. Psychology Press, London
Guarini M (2011) Computational neural modeling and the philosophy of ethics reflections on the particularism-generalism debate. In: Anderson M, Anderson SL (eds) Machine ethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Google-Books-ID: N4IF2p4w7uwC
Ham J, Spahn A (2015) Shall i show you some other shirts too? The psychology and ethics of persuasive robots. In: Trappl R (ed) A construction manual for robots’ ethical systems: requirements, methods, implementations, cognitive technologies. Springer, Cham, pp 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21548-8_4
Haring KS, Mosley A, Pruznick S, Fleming J, Satterfield K, de Visser EJ, Tossell CC, Funke G (2019) Robot authority in human-machine teams: effects of human-like appearance on compliance. In: Chen JY, Fragomeni G (eds) Virtual, augmented and mixed reality. applications and case studies. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Cham, pp 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21565-1_5
Harman G (2000) The nonexistence of character traits. In: Proceedings of the Aristotelian society, vol 100. JSTOR, pp 223–226
Hoffman G, Forlizzi J, Ayal S, Steinfeld A, Antanitis J, Hochman G, Hochendoner E, Finkenaur J (2015) Robot presence and human honesty: experimental evidence. In: 2015 10th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction (HRI), pp 181–188. ISSN: 2167-2121
Howard A, Borenstein J (2018) The ugly truth about ourselves and our robot creations: the problem of bias and social inequity. Sci Eng Ethics 24(5):1521–1536
Hughes CE, Benoit TS (2017) Culturally adaptive avatar simulator. https://patents.google.com/patent/US9690784B1/en
Jeong S, Logan DE, Goodwin MS, Graca S, O’Connell B, Goodenough H, Anderson L, Stenquist N, Fitzpatrick K, Zisook M, Plummer L, Breazeal C, Weinstock P (2015) A social robot to mitigate stress, anxiety, and pain in hospital pediatric care. In: Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction extended abstracts, HRI’15 extended abstracts. Association for Computing Machinery, Portland, pp 103–104. https://doi.org/10.1145/2701973.2702028
Ku H, Choi JJ, Lee S, Jang S, Do W (2018) Designing shelly, a robot capable of assessing and restraining children’s robot abusing behaviors. In: Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, HRI ’18. Association for Computing Machinery, Chicago, pp 161–162. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173386.3176973
Laitinen A (2016) Robots and human sociality: normative expectations, the need for recognition, and the social bases of self-esteem. In: Sociable robots and the future of social relations. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 313–322. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-708-5-313
Lin YC, Liu TC, Chang M, Yeh SP (2009) Exploring childrens perceptions of the robots. In: Chang M, Kuo R, Kinshuk, Chen GD, Hirose M (eds) Learning by playing. Game-based education system design and development, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, pp 512–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03364-3_63
Lumbreras S (2017) The limits of machine ethics. Religions 8(5):100. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel8050100
Malle BF, Scheutz M (2015) When will people regard robots as morally competent social partners? In: 2015 24th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 486–491. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2015.7333667
Merritt M (2000) Virtue ethics and situationist personality psychology. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 3(4):365–383. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009926720584
Meuhlhauser L, Helm L (2012) Intelligence explosion and machine ethics. In: Singularity hypotheses: a scientific and philosophical assessment, pp 101–126
Moor JH (2006) The nature, importance, and difficulty of machine ethics. IEEE Intell Syst 21(4):18–21
Mubin O, Cappuccio M, Alnajjar F, Ahmad MI, Shahid S (2020) Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-00954-8
Nomura T, Kanda T, Kidokoro H, Suehiro Y, Yamada S (2016) Why do children abuse robots? Interact Stud 17(3):347–369. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.17.3.02nom
Nussbaum MC (2009) Hiding from humanity: disgust, shame, and the law. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Obaid M, Aylett R, Barendregt W, Basedow C, Corrigan LJ, Hall L, Jones A, Kappas A, Küster D, Paiva A et al (2018) Endowing a robotic tutor with empathic qualities: design and pilot evaluation. Int J Humanoid Rob 15(06):1850025
Ogunyale T, Bryant D, Howard A (2018) Does removing stereotype priming remove bias? A pilot human-robot interaction study. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.00948
Reich-Stiebert N, Eyssel F (2015) Learning with educational companion robots? Toward attitudes on education robots, predictors of attitudes, and application potentials for education robots. Int J Soc Robotics 7(5):875–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0308-9
Reichenbach J, Bartneck C, Carpenter J (2006) Well done, robot! The importance of praise and presence in human–robot collaboration. In: ROMAN 2006—The 15th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication, pp 86–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2006.314399. ISSN: 1944-9437
Roizman M, Hoffman G, Ayal S, Hochman G, Tagar MR, Maaravi Y (2016) Studying the opposing effects of robot presence on human corruption. In: 2016 11th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction (HRI), pp 501–502. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451826. ISSN: 2167-2148
Sandoval EB (2019) Addiction to social robots: a research proposal. In: 2019 14th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction (HRI), pp 526–527. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2019.8673143
Sandoval EB, Brandstetter J, Bartneck C (2016) Can a robot bribe a human? The measurement of the negative side of reciprocity in human robot interaction. In: 2016 11th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction (HRI)
Sandoval EB, Brandstetter J, Obaid M, Bartneck C (2016) Reciprocity in human–robot interaction: a quantitative approach through the Prisoner’s dilemma and the ultimatum game. Int J Soc Robotics 8(2):303–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0323-x
Sartre JP (2001) Being and nothingness: an essay in phenomenological ontology. Citadel Press, New York
Serholt S, Barendregt W (2014) Students’ attitudes towards the possible future of social robots in education. In: Workshop proceedings of RO-MAN
Sparrow R (2017) Robots, rape, and representation. Int J Soc Robotics 9(4):465–477
Sparrow R (2017) Robots, rape, and representation. Int J Soc Robotics 9(4):465–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0413-z
Sparrow R (2020) Virtue and vice in our relationships with robots: Is there an asymmetry and how might it be explained? Int J Soc Robotics 1–7
Strait M, Ramos AS, Contreras V, Garcia N (2018) Robots racialized in the likeness of marginalized social identities are subject to greater dehumanization than those racialized as white. In: 2018 27th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, pp 452–457
Vallor S (2015) Moral deskilling and upskilling in a new machine age: reflections on the ambiguous future of character. Philos Technol 28(1):107–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-014-0156-9
Vallor S (2016) Technology and the virtues: a philosophical guide to a future worth wanting. Oxford University Press, Oxford Google-Books-ID: RaCkDAAAQBAJ
Vlachos E, Schärfe H (2014) Social robots as persuasive agents. In: international conference on social computing and social media. Springer, Cham, pp 277–284
Wallach W, Allen C (2008) Moral machines: teaching robots right from wrong. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Wallach W, Franklin S, Allen C (2010) A conceptual and computational model of moral decision making in human and artificial agents. Top Cogn Sci 2(3):454–485
Weizenbaum J (1966) Elizaa computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Commun ACM 9(1):36–45
Wesche JS, Sonderegger A (2019) When computers take the lead: the automation of leadership. Comput Hum Behav 101:197–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.027
Whitby B (2012) Do you want a robot lover? The ethics of caring technologies. In: Lin P, Abney K, Bekey GA (eds) Robot ethics: the ethical and social implications of robotics. MITP, pp 233–248. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6733984
Wiegel V (2010) Wendell Wallach and Colin Allen: moral machines: teaching robots right from wrong. Ethics Inf Technol 12(4):359–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9239-1
You S, Nie J, Suh K, Sundar SS (2011) When the robot criticizes you...: self-serving bias in human–robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human–robot interaction, HRI ’11. Association for Computing Machinery, Lausanne, pp 295–296. https://doi.org/10.1145/1957656.1957778
Zaal E, Mills G, Hagen A, Huisman C, Hoeks J (2017) Convincing conversations: using a computer-based dialogue system to promote a plant-based diet. In: CogSci
Zahavi D (2010) Shame and the exposed self. In: Webber J (ed) Reading Sartre: on phenomenology and existentialism. Routledge, Abingdon
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Funding
This research was supported by a DHRG Seedcorn Funding Grant awarded to Omar Mubin and Massimiliano L. Cappuccio by the School of Digital Humanities of Western Sydney University on 19/5/2018.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cappuccio, M.L., Sandoval, E.B., Mubin, O. et al. Can Robots Make us Better Humans?. Int J of Soc Robotics 13, 7–22 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00700-6
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00700-6