Robocalypse? Yes, Please! The Role of Robot Autonomy in the Development of Ambivalent Attitudes Towards Robots

Abstract

Attitudes towards robots are not always unequivocally positive or negative: when attitudes encompass both strong positive and strong negative evaluations about an attitude object, people experience an unpleasant state of evaluative conflict, called ambivalence. To shed light on ambivalence towards robots, we conducted a mixed-methods experiment with N = 163 German university students that investigated the influence of robot autonomy on robot-related attitudes. With technological progress, robots become increasingly autonomous. We hypothesized that high levels of robot autonomy would increase both positive and negative robot-related evaluations, resulting in more attitudinal ambivalence. We experimentally manipulated robot autonomy through text vignettes and assessed objective ambivalence (i.e., the amount of reported conflicting thoughts and feelings) and subjective ambivalence (i.e., self-reported experienced conflict) towards the robot ‘VIVA’ using qualitative and quantitative measures. Autonomy did not impact objective ambivalence. However, subjective ambivalence was higher towards the robot high versus low in autonomy. Interestingly, this effect turned non-significant when controlling for individual differences in technology commitment. Qualitative results were categorized by two independent raters into assets (e.g., assistance, companionship) and risks (e.g., privacy/data security, social isolation). Taken together, the present research demonstrated that attitudes towards robots are indeed ambivalent and that this ambivalence might influence behavioral intentions towards robots. Moreover, the findings highlight the important role of technology commitment. Finally, qualitative results shed light on potential users’ concerns and aspirations. This way, these data provide useful insights into factors that facilitate human–robot research.

What do Members of Parliament in India Think of Robots? Validation of the Frankenstein Syndrome Questionnaire and Comparison with Other Population Groups

“…A small positive correlation between positive and negative views on humanoid robots has also been reported previously [11]. Similar attitude ambivalence has been reported in a mixed-methods study investigating participants' views about a specific robot [7]. It appears, therefore, that individuals can hold both positive as well as negative attitudes towards humanoid robots and that these are not necessarily mutually exclusive.…”

“…Although many people make contact with increasingly common surgical robots [2], more interactive general attitude that individuals hold irrespective of whether they had been exposed to a robot. Such attitudes could be developed through information obtained from media such as films [7]. While acceptance is useful to explore or finetune functionality, morphology, and presentation of the robot, acceptability is more relevant to assess when investigating the use of robots in principle -thus more commonly at the very early stages of robot development.…”

Who's in Charge?

“…Thus, perceptions of personalized robots would not be univalent, but torn between two conflicting evaluations at once. This phenomenon is referred to as attitudinal ambivalence and may also affect perceptions of robots [71,72], especially when deemed autonomous [72]. Future research should take ambivalent attitudes towards robots into account when investigating the effects of personalization on HRI.…”

Heterogeneity of Attitudes toward Robots in Healthcare among the Chinese Public: A Latent Profile Analysis

“…In fact, recent studies have demonstrated that people's attitudes toward the targeted object may be ambivalent and cannot be simply described as just negative or positive [21], which have been studied in various domains, such as artificial intelligence (AI) [22] and online private-information sharing [23]. In the healthcare context, a qualitative metasynthesis revealed the ambivalent nature of end users' attitudes toward robotics in motor rehabilitation, namely the dilemma between benefits (e.g., improvement in activities of daily life) and challenges (e.g., the fear of being controlled by robots) during the interaction with robotic devices [24].…”

“…In the healthcare context, a qualitative metasynthesis revealed the ambivalent nature of end users' attitudes toward robotics in motor rehabilitation, namely the dilemma between benefits (e.g., improvement in activities of daily life) and challenges (e.g., the fear of being controlled by robots) during the interaction with robotic devices [24]. In addition, several quantitative studies explored the relationship between ambivalent attitudes toward robots and other key variables through experiments, such as their mental abilities [13] and autonomy [21]. Therefore, it seems crucial to identify distinct clusters of attitudes toward robots in healthcare within a homogeneous population of interest, which will provide empirical insights into the development and potential future uses of healthcare robots in HRI research.…”