Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Stedtler, Samantha, Leventi, Marianna
Natura: Preprint
Pubblicazione: 2025
Soggetti:
Accesso online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.01862
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866915530744528896
author Stedtler, Samantha
Leventi, Marianna
author_facet Stedtler, Samantha
Leventi, Marianna
contents This paper argues that conventional blame practices fall short of capturing the complexity of moral experiences, neglecting power dynamics and discriminatory social practices. It is evident that robots, embodying roles linked to specific social groups, pose a risk of reinforcing stereotypes of how these groups behave or should behave, so they set a normative and descriptive standard. In addition, we argue that faulty robots might create expectations of who is supposed to compensate and repair after their errors, where social groups that are already disadvantaged might be blamed disproportionately if they do not act according to their ascribed roles. This theoretical and empirical gap becomes even more urgent to address as there have been indications of potential carryover effects from Human-Robot Interactions (HRI) to Human-Human Interactions (HHI). We therefore urge roboticists and designers to stay in an ongoing conversation about how social traits are conceptualised and implemented in this technology. We also argue that one solution could be to 'embrace the glitch' and to focus on constructively disrupting practices instead of prioritizing efficiency and smoothness of interaction above everything else. Apart from considering ethical aspects in the design phase of social robots, we see our analysis as a call for more research on the consequences of robot stereotyping and blame attribution.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2510_01862
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Who is responsible? Social Identity, Robot Errors and Blame Attribution
Stedtler, Samantha
Leventi, Marianna
Human-Computer Interaction
This paper argues that conventional blame practices fall short of capturing the complexity of moral experiences, neglecting power dynamics and discriminatory social practices. It is evident that robots, embodying roles linked to specific social groups, pose a risk of reinforcing stereotypes of how these groups behave or should behave, so they set a normative and descriptive standard. In addition, we argue that faulty robots might create expectations of who is supposed to compensate and repair after their errors, where social groups that are already disadvantaged might be blamed disproportionately if they do not act according to their ascribed roles. This theoretical and empirical gap becomes even more urgent to address as there have been indications of potential carryover effects from Human-Robot Interactions (HRI) to Human-Human Interactions (HHI). We therefore urge roboticists and designers to stay in an ongoing conversation about how social traits are conceptualised and implemented in this technology. We also argue that one solution could be to 'embrace the glitch' and to focus on constructively disrupting practices instead of prioritizing efficiency and smoothness of interaction above everything else. Apart from considering ethical aspects in the design phase of social robots, we see our analysis as a call for more research on the consequences of robot stereotyping and blame attribution.
title Who is responsible? Social Identity, Robot Errors and Blame Attribution
topic Human-Computer Interaction
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.01862