Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35480086›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2022

Embodied Digital Technologies: First Insights in the Social and Legal Perception of Robots and Users of Prostheses.

Sarah Mandl, Maximilian Bretschneider, Stefanie Meyer, Dagmar Gesmann-Nuissl, Frank Asbrock, Bertolt Meyer, Anja Strobel

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sarah MandlPersonality Psychology and Assessment, Institute of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, Germany.
Maximilian BretschneiderSocial Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, Germany.
Stefanie MeyerPrivate Law and Intellectual Property Rights, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, Germany.
Dagmar Gesmann-NuisslPrivate Law and Intellectual Property Rights, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, Germany.
Frank AsbrockSocial Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, Germany.
Bertolt MeyerWork, Organizational, and Economic Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, Germany.
Anja StrobelPersonality Psychology and Assessment, Institute of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New bionic technologies and robots are becoming increasingly common in workspaces and private spheres. It is thus crucial to understand concerns regarding their use in social and legal terms and the qualities they should possess to be accepted as 'co-workers'. Previous research in these areas used the Stereotype Content Model to investigate, for example, attributions of Warmth and Competence towards people who use bionic prostheses, cyborgs, and robots. In the present study, we propose to differentiate the Warmth dimension into the dimensions of Sociability and Morality to gain deeper insight into how people with or without bionic prostheses are perceived. In addition, we extend our research to the perception of robots. Since legal aspects need to be considered if robots are expected to be 'co-workers', for the first time, we also evaluated current perceptions of robots in terms of legal aspects. We conducted two studies: In Study 1, participants rated visual stimuli of individuals with or without disabilities and low- or high-tech prostheses, and robots of different levels of Anthropomorphism in terms of perceived Competence, Sociability, and Morality. In Study 2, participants rated robots of different levels of Anthropomorphism in terms of perceived Competence, Sociability, and Morality, and additionally, Legal Personality, and Decision-Making Authority. We also controlled for participants' personality. Results showed that attributions of Competence and Morality varied as a function of the technical sophistication of the prostheses. For robots, Competence attributions were negatively related to Anthropomorphism. Perception of Sociability, Morality, Legal Personality, and Decision-Making Authority varied as functions of Anthropomorphism. Overall, this study contributes to technological design, which aims to ensure high acceptance and minimal undesirable side effects, both with regard to the application of bionic instruments and robotics. Additionally, first insights into whether more anthropomorphized robots will need to be considered differently in terms of legal practice are given.

Indexed as

anthropomorphismbionicslegal perceptionprostheticsrobotssocial perceptionstereotypes

Identifiers

PMID35480086
PMCPMC9037747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.