Politicising Animal-Computer Interaction: an Approach to Political Engagement with Animal-Centred Design

Mancini, Clara; Hirsch-Matsioulas, Orit; Metcalfe, Daniel

doi:10.1145/3565995.3566034

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the types of machines we currently use within these areas are very different, with some robots being used to do ‘jobs’ and others as sources of enrichment for animals or for training animals to undertake particular tasks (Mancini 2023 ; Nawroth 2023 ; Neary 2023 ; Ward 2023 ), the informal discussions that were facilitated during this workshop highlighted commonalities across the three discipline areas in relation to the benefits and challenges of MAIs. This is an important point to recognise as it provides further evidence for the need for collaborative approaches to animal welfare science.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

Williams,

Sadler,

Rutter

et al. 2024

Anim. welf.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals under human care are exposed to a potentially large range of both familiar and unfamiliar humans. Human-animal interactions vary across settings, and individuals, with the nature of the interaction being affected by a suite of different intrinsic and extrinsic factors. These interactions can be described as positive, negative or neutral. Across some industries, there has been a move towards the development of technologies to support or replace human interactions with animals. Whilst this has many benefits, there can also be challenges associated with increased technology use. A day-long Animal Welfare Research Network workshop was hosted at Harper Adams University, UK, with the aim of bringing together stakeholders and researchers (n = 38) from the companion, farm and zoo animal fields, to discuss benefits, challenges and limitations of human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions for animals under human care and create a list of future research priorities. The workshop consisted of four talks from experts within these areas, followed by break-out room discussions. This work is the outcome of that workshop. The key recommendations are that approaches to advancing the scientific discipline of machine-animal interactions in animals under human care should focus on: (1) interdisciplinary collaboration; (2) development of validated methods; (3) incorporation of an animal-centred perspective; (4) a focus on promotion of positive animal welfare states (not just avoidance of negative states); and (5) an exploration of ways that machines can support a reduction in the exposure of animals to negative human-animal interactions to reduce negative, and increase positive, experiences for animals.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

Williams,

Sadler,

Rutter

et al. 2024

Anim. welf.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In marked contrast, and paralleling human-centred values inherited from HCI, ACI takes a fundamentally different approach to the ethics of research involving animals. At least in principle, ACI adopts an animal-centred perspective grounded not only in animal welfare frameworks (e.g., [60,64]) but also in political philosophies of multispecies justice, with an emphasis on animals' agency, capabilities and dignity (e.g., [33,62]). Consistent with this perspective, ACI researchers have proposed ethical frameworks for the involvement of animals in research( [22,31,61]) as well as approaches to support researchers' ethical engagement with individuals during research activities [51] .…”

Section: Ethical Review and Disciplinary Assumptions In Acimentioning

confidence: 99%

Charting Ethical Tensions in Multispecies Technology Research through Beneficiary-Epistemology Space

Benford,

Mancini,

Chamberlain

et al. 2024

Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While ethical challenges are widely discussed in HCI, far less is reported about the ethical processes that researchers routinely navigate. We reflect on a multispecies project that negotiated an especially complex ethical approval process. Cat Royale was an artist-led exploration of creating an artwork to engage audiences in exploring trust in autonomous systems. The artwork took the form of a robot that played with three cats. Gaining ethical approval required an extensive dialogue with three Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) covering computer science, veterinary science and animal welfare, raising tensions around the welfare of the cats, perceived benefits and appropriate methods, and reputational risk to the University. To reveal these tensions we introduce beneficiary-epistemology space, that makes explicit who benefits from research (humans or animals) and underlying epistemologies. Positioning projects and IRBs in this space can help clarify tensions and highlight opportunities to recruit additional expertise.

show abstract

Responsible ACI: Expanding the Influence of Animal-Computer Interaction

Mancini

2023

The Tenth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With emerging technologies powered by AI and IoT affecting animals in unprecedented ways, a question for the ACI community is how to expand the field's influence so that the computing interactions to which animals are exposed do not harm but benefit them. This position paper proposes that more ACI work could: focus on the risks that technology poses for animals and the impacts of technology that does not necessarily target them, as well as on the benefits of technologies that target them; re-frame human-centric ethical frameworks produced by governance bodies from a multispecies perspective against which to foreground impacts of technologies on animals; explicitly relate ACI work to global societal priorities set by governance bodies against which to highlight how an animal-centred perspective can support those. The paper encourages researchers to take responsibility for the challenge of giving animals representation amongst anthropocentric pressures and, despite necessary compromises, to continue to push for animal-centred technological innovation. CCS CONCEPTS• Insert your first CCS term here • Insert your second CCS term here • Insert your third CCS term here.

show abstract

Politicising Animal-Computer Interaction: an Approach to Political Engagement with Animal-Centred Design

Cited by 4 publications

References 36 publications

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

Charting Ethical Tensions in Multispecies Technology Research through Beneficiary-Epistemology Space

Responsible ACI: Expanding the Influence of Animal-Computer Interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About