The Ethics of Inherent Trust in Care Robots for the Elderly

Abstract

The way elderly care is delivered is changing. Attempts are being made to accommodate the increasing number of elderly, and the decline in the number of people available to care for them, with care robots. This change introduces ethical issues into robotics and healthcare. The two-part study (heuristic evaluation and survey) reported here examines a phenomenon which is a result of that change. The phenomenon rises out of a contradiction. All but 2 (who were undecided) of the 12 elderly survey respondents, out of the total of 102 respondents, wanted to be able to change how the presented care robot made decisions and 7 of those 12 elderly wanted to be able to examine its decision making process so as to ensure the care provided is personalized. However, at the same time, 34% of the elderly participants said they were willing to trust the care robot inherently, compared to only 16% of the participants who were under fifty. Additionally, 66% of the elderly respondents said they were very likely or likely to accept and use such a care robot in their everyday lives. The contradiction of inherent trust and simultaneous wariness about control gives rise to the phenomenon: elderly in need want control over their care to ensure it is personalized, but many may desperately take any help they can get. The possible causes, and ethical implications, of this phenomenon are the focus of this paper.

Overcoming carer shortages with care robots: Dynamic value trade-offs in run-time

“…But it is also a concern, indicating that some elderly may be so desperate for care that they deem a new technology acceptable, usable, and more inherently trustworthy, than younger generations would, before seeing it. This concern has been expressed and explored by Poulsen, Burmeister, & Kreps (2018).…”

Age-Related Differences in Fixation Pattern on a Companion Robot

“…A total of 68 participants volunteered to participate in the study. To investigate age-related differences in looking at the companion robot, we divided them into two groups: older adults aged 50 and older [ 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ] and younger adults aged 30 and younger. However, three older adults (P14, P16, P32) and three young adults (P1, P15, P34) were excluded due to calibration failure that lasted more than 10 min.…”

Differences in Interactions with a Conversational Agent

“…The study was conducted in their homes because Clova requires a wireless network connection. To investigate the differences in the CA use by age group, we divided participants into two groups: older and younger [31]. For this paper, the older group included all participants aged 50 years and older, and the younger group comprised participants aged under 50 years old [31][32][33].…”

“…To investigate the differences in the CA use by age group, we divided participants into two groups: older and younger [31]. For this paper, the older group included all participants aged 50 years and older, and the younger group comprised participants aged under 50 years old [31][32][33]. After the end of the experiment, all participants were paid about $300 for participating in the study.…”