Cited by 99Social Robot Interaction and HRIEthics and Social Impacts of AITechnology Use by Older Adults

Ethical Challenges in the Use of Social Service Robots for Elderly People

Körtner, T.·2016·Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie

Abstract

Socially assistive robots are increasingly discussed as solutions in care and domestic use for the support of senior adults; however, this raises ethical questions which hitherto have not been considered or were not predictable. The most important questions are those of privacy and data protection, safety and responsibility as well as involvement of vulnerable persons and deception. Consequently, the ethical principles of nonmaleficence, beneficence, autonomy and fairness should be transposed to robotics. Clear answers and solutions are not yet available for every ethical challenge in robotics; however, the development of ethical guidelines for deployment of robots and research in the field of social service robots (SSR) are essential steps in order to embed ethics into dealing with socially assistive robots. This article provides some practical suggestions on this issue from a robotics project.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00391-016-1066-5

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. European Commission (2015) Demography Report – 2015 Edition. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
  2. Kothgassner OD, Weber D, Felnhofer A (2011) Geroethics: Ethische Aspekte im Umgang mit assistiven Technologien und altersbedingten Erkrankungen. In: Kryspin-Exner I, Kothgassner OD (eds) Ethik in der Psychologie. Facultas.wuv, Wien, pp 148–159
  3. Panek P, Mayer P, Schuller F, Zagler WL (2015) Beiträge zur Modellierung von „Persönlichkeit“ bei assistiven Robotern für alte Menschen zwecks besserer Mensch-Roboter Interaktion. In: AAL-Kongress 2015. VDE, Berlin

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Körtner, T.
Affiliations
Akademie für Altersforschung am Haus der Barmherzigkeit (AT)
Corresponding author
Körtner, T.
Venue
Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie
Published
2016-05-25
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
303-307
ISSN
  • 0948-6704 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-1269
OpenAlex
W2404111443
Cited by
99
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
11.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
EU Seventh Framework Programme (600623)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
Keywords
socially assistive robots, elderly care, robot ethics, privacy, data protection, robot safety, responsibility, deception, vulnerable populations, autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, fairness, moral norms
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Austria, Confidentiality, Female, Humans, Informed Consent, Male, Man-Machine Systems, Robotics, Self-Help Devices, Social Support, User-Computer Interface, Vulnerable Populations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review