Cited by 107Social Robot Interaction and HRIPsychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Which robot am I thinking about? The impact of action and appearance on people's evaluations of a moral robot

Malle, Bertram F., Scheutz, Matthias, Forlizzi, Jodi, Voiklis, John·2016·2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)

Abstract

In three studies we found further evidence for a previously discovered Human-Robot (HR) asymmetry in moral judgments: that people blame robots more for inaction than action in a moral dilemma but blame humans more for action than inaction in the identical dilemma (where inaction allows four persons to die and action sacrifices one to save the four). Importantly, we found that people's representation of the “robot” making these moral decisions appears to be one of a mechanical robot. For when we manipulated the pictorial display of a verbally described robot, people showed the HR asymmetry only when making judgments about a mechanical-looking robot, not a humanoid robot. This is the first demonstration that robot appearance affects people's moral judgments about robots.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/hri.2016.7451743

Cites

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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For robot failures, humans blame robots more for failures of inaction than for failures of action.

    “However, Malle et al. have shown that for robot failures, there is an asymmetry of blame-that humans blame robots more for failures of inaction than of action [53,54].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 34 · Cited by 107

Authors
Malle, B. F., Scheutz, M., Forlizzi, J., & Voiklis, J.
Affiliations
  • Brown University (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2016-03
Pages
125-132
OpenAlex
W4235157082
Cited by
107
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 13
FWCI
12.93
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (publishedVersion)
Funders
Office of Naval Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
moral judgment, robot appearance, humanoid robots, inaction, ethical dilemmas, blame attribution

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