Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39467645›Full record

ArticleMedical humanities2025

Why robot embodiment matters: questions of disability, race and intersectionality in the design of social robots.

Mark Paterson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical humanities, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Mark PatersonSociology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA paterson@pitt.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2701-4827

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing minority of those with disabilities are people of color (POC), with, for example, autism diagnosis rates now higher for children of color than for white children in the USA. This trend underscores the need for assistive technologies, especially socially assistive robots, to be designed with intersectional users in mind. Outside of Japan, most robots are designed with white synthetic skin and able-bodied features, failing to reflect the diverse users they are meant to assist. This paper explores the concept of the "engineering imaginary," the historical and cultural influences that shape these designs, and which tend to limit robot embodiment to white, able-bodied forms. Drawing on work from scholars like Lucy Suchman, Jennifer Rhee, Neda Atanasoski and Kalindi Vora, the paper critiques this engineering bias. A key historical moment in the production of the engineered imaginary of artificial humans is provided by Ovid's myth of Pygmalion and its influence on representations across literature, film, and then robotics. Furthermore, the physicality of the robot, and its role in the production of nonverbal communication (NVC) for more inclusive interaction with humans is explored, seeing these as steps toward what some roboticists are calling Artificial Empathy (AE). Through case studies like Bestic, Bina48, and HuggieBot 3.0, the paper explores what I call

Indexed as

Persons with DisabilitiesRoboticsEmpathyEquipment DesignHumansNonverbal CommunicationRacial GroupsSelf-Help Devicescultural historydigital technologydisabilitygender studiesliterary studies

Identifiers

PMID39467645
PMCPMC11877043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.