Gender Stereotyping of Robotic Systems in Eldercare: An Exploratory Analysis of Ethical Problems and Possible Solutions

Abstract

Socio psychological studies show that gender stereotypes play an important role in human-robot interaction. However, they may have various morally problematic implications and consequences that need ethical consideration, especially in a sensitive field like eldercare. Against this backdrop, we conduct an exploratory ethical analysis of moral issues of gender stereotyping in robotics for eldercare. The leading question is what moral problems and conflicts can arise from gender stereotypes in care robots for older people and how we should deal with them. We first provide an overview on the state of empirical research regarding gender stereotyping in human-robot interaction and the special field of care robotics for older people. Starting from a principlist approach, we then map possible moral problems and conflicts with regard to common ethical principles of autonomy, care, and justice. We subsequently consider possible solutions for the development and implementation of morally acceptable robots for eldercare, focusing on three different strategies: explanation, neutralization, and queering of care robots. Finally, we discuss potentials and problems associated with these three strategies and conclude that especially the queering of robotics and the idea of a gender-fluid robot offers an innovative outlook that deserves closer ethical, social, and technological examination.

Gender and Age Stereotypes in Robotics for Eldercare: Ethical Implications of Stakeholder Perspectives from Technology Development, Industry, and Nursing

“…A first exploration reveals a range of moral aspects regarding autonomy, care, and justice that may affect older people themselves, their caregivers, as well as society at large (for the following, cf. Weßel et al, 2021 ). In view of autonomy , one important question is whether users can make informed and voluntary decisions for or against the implementation of stereotypes.…”

“…While there are individual studies on aspects of age (Huff et al, 2020 ; Pak et al, 2020 ) or race (Addison et al, 2019 ; Bartneck et al, 2018 ; Louine et al, 2018 ; Sparrow, 2020 ), the bulk of pertinent research concentrates on perceptions of a robot’s gender, the relevant cues and markers, and their effects (e.g., Eyssel & Hegel, 2012 ; Ladwig & Ferstl, 2018 ; Nomura, 2017 ). These cues and markers can be categorized as morphological, vocal, or behavioral, as well as individual-related (Weßel et al, 2021 ).…”

“…At the same time, however, such stereotyping strategies give cause for considerable moral concerns. For example, they may undermine user autonomy by subtle manipulation, compromise wellbeing by ignoring individual preferences, and might arguably reinforce prejudice and discrimination, for instance against women or older people (Weßel et al, 2021 ). Accordingly, there are proposals to design robots without the respective cues and markers, to prevent users from anthropomorphizing them altogether, or even to subvert or challenge stereotypical attributions (Dufour & Ehrwein Nihan, 2016 ; Eyssel & Hegel, 2012 ; Wang et al, 2021 ).…”

Normativity assumptions in the design and application of social robots for autistic children

“…This is potentially problematic, as an homogenous group of designers might be likely to design a product from a shared background and shared biases, increasing the risks that the end product might not be as useful for all, and potentially also outright harmful for some, users [13]. One example is how robots rely on gender stereotyping, and how this generates ethical issues in the application of social robots in, for example, eldercare [14]. The broader issue we focus on in this article is how robots enact and embody a problematic normativity which might cause harms to marginalized users.…”

“…Lastly, social robots may be used to detect and monitor normalcy [20,21]. This relates to robots that rely on gender stereotyping either in their design or in how they operate [14]. From a clinical point of view, considering the complexity and heterogeneity that is a hallmark of the autism diagnosis, it is difficult to see social robots completely substituting as opposed to supporting professionals in any near future.…”