CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 24Ethics and Social Impacts of AISocial Robot Interaction and HRILiterary and Philosophical Studies

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Perceptions of Sentient AI and Other Digital Minds: Evidence from the AI, Morality, and Sentience (AIMS) Survey

Open access
Anthis, Jacy Reese, Pauketat, Janet V. T., Ladak, Ali, Manoli, Aikaterina·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2407.08867arXiv 2407.08867
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Humans now interact with a variety of digital minds, AI systems that appear to have mental faculties such as reasoning, emotion, and agency, and public figures are discussing the possibility of sentient AI. We present initial results from 2021 and 2023 for the nationally representative AI, Morality, and Sentience (AIMS) survey (N = 3,500). Mind perception and moral concern for AI welfare were surprisingly high and significantly increased: in 2023, one in five U.S. adults believed some AI systems are currently sentient, and 38% supported legal rights for sentient AI. People became more opposed to building digital minds: in 2023, 63% supported banning smarter-than-human AI, and 69% supported banning sentient AI. The median 2023 forecast was that sentient AI would arrive in just five years. The development of safe and beneficial AI requires not just technical study but understanding the complex ways in which humans perceive and coexist with digital minds.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2407.08867

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Both groups showed the least support for granting socio-political rights to AI systems with subjective experience, intermediate support for treating such systems as moral patients, and the strongest support for imposing responsibilities and duties.

    “In line with previous studies, both groups exhibited the least support for granting AI systems with subjective experience socio-political rights, middling support for offering protections that consider AI systems as moral patients, and strong support for requiring certain responsibilities and duties”

    From Subjective Experience in AI Systems: What Do AI Researchers and the Public Believe? (2025) · cites this paper as Anthis et al. 2024

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 159

  1. [1][1] Gavin Abercrombie, Amanda Cercas Curry, Tanvi Dinkar, Verena Rieser, and Zeerak Talat. 2023. Mirages. On Anthropomorphism in Dialogue Systems. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , Houda Bouamor, Juan Pino, and Kalika Bali (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Singapore, 4776-4790. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/ 2023.emnlp-main.290 - · DOI
  2. [3][3] Douglas G Altman and Patrick Royston. 2006. The Cost of Dichotomising Continuous Variables. BMJ 332, 7549 (May 2006), 1080.1. https://doi.org/10. 1136/bmj.332.7549.1080 -
  3. [4][4] Gado Alzouma. 2005. Myths of Digital Technology in Africa: Leapfrogging Development? Global Media and Communication 1, 3 (December 2005), 339-356. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766505058128 - · DOI
  4. [6][6] Jacy Reese Anthis. 2022. Consciousness Semanticism: A Precise Eliminativist Theory of Consciousness. In Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architectures 2021 , Valentin V. Klimov and David J. Kelley (Eds.). Vol. 1032. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 20-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96993-6\_3 Series Title: Studies in Computational Intelligence. - · DOI
  5. [5][5] Tawfiq Ammari, Jofish Kaye, Janice Y. Tsai, and Frank Bentley. 2019. Music, Search, and IoT: How People (Really) Use Voice Assistants. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 26, 3 (June 2019), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3311956 -
  6. [7][7] Jacy Reese Anthis and Eze Paez. 2021. Moral Circle Expansion: A Promising Strategy to Impact the Far Future. Futures 130 (June 2021), 102756. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102756 - · DOI
  7. [9][9] Grace Augustine, Sara Soderstrom, Daniel Milner, and Klaus Weber. 2019. Constructing a Distant Future: Imaginaries in Geoengineering. Academy of Management Journal 62, 6 (December 2019), 1930-1960. https://doi.org/10. 5465/amj.2018.0059 -
  8. [8][8] Arthur Aron, Elaine N. Aron, and Danny Smollan. 1992. Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the Structure of Interpersonal Closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63, 4 (October 1992), 596-612. https://doi.org/10.1037/00223514.63.4.596 - · DOI
  9. [10][10] Jaime Banks and Autumn Edwards. 2019. A Common Social Distance Scale for Robots and Humans. In 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) . IEEE, New Delhi, India, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN46459.2019.8956316 - · DOI
  10. [12][12] Emily M. Bender and Alexander Koller. 2020. Climbing towards NLU: On Meaning, Form, and Understanding in the Age of Data. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics . Association for Computational Linguistics, Online, 5185-5198. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/ 2020.acl-main.463 - · DOI
  11. [11][11] Pablo Barberá, Andreu Casas, Jonathan Nagler, Patrick J. Egan, Richard Bonneau, John T. Jost, and Joshua A. Tucker. 2019. Who Leads? Who Follows? Measuring Issue Attention and Agenda Setting by Legislators and the Mass Public Using Social Media Data. American Political Science Review 113, 4 (November 2019), 883-901. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055419000352 - · DOI
  12. [15][15] Nick Bostrom. 2014. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (first edition ed.). Oxford University Press, Oxford. -
  13. [14][14] Michael Ian Borer. 2010. From Collective Memory to Collective Imagination: Time, Place, and Urban Redevelopment. Symbolic Interaction 33, 1 (January 2010), 96-114. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2010.33.1.96 - · DOI
  14. [16][16] Emma Boulstridge and Marylyn Carrigan. 2000. Do Consumers Really Care about Corporate Responsibility? Highlighting the Attitude-Behaviour Gap. Journal of Communication Management 4, 4 (January 2000), 355-368. https: //doi.org/10.1108/eb023532 - · DOI · Paper page
  15. [18][18] Casey Breen, Cormac Herley, and Elissa M. Redmiles. 2022. A Large-Scale Measurement of Cybercrime Against Individuals. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, New Orleans LA USA, 1-41. https://doi. org/10.1145/3491102.3517613 - · DOI
  16. [17][17] Sarah Brayne. 2021. Predict and Surveil: Data, Discretion, and the Future of Policing . Oxford University Press, New York, NY. -
  17. [19][19] Dražen Brščić, Hiroyuki Kidokoro, Yoshitaka Suehiro, and Takayuki Kanda. 2015. Escaping from Children's Abuse of Social Robots. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction . ACM, Portland Oregon USA, 59-66. https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696468 - · DOI · Paper page
  18. [21][21] Paul Burstein. 2003. The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and an Agenda. Political Research Quarterly 56, 1 (March 2003), 29-40. https: //doi.org/10.1177/106591290305600103 - · DOI
  19. [20][20] Zana Buçinca, Maja Barbara Malaya, and Krzysztof Z. Gajos. 2021. To Trust or to Think: Cognitive Forcing Functions Can Reduce Overreliance on AI in AI-assisted Decision-making. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (April 2021), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449287 - · DOI · Paper page
  20. [22][22] Ángel Alexander Cabrera, Adam Perer, and Jason I. Hong. 2023. Improving Human-AI Collaboration With Descriptions of AI Behavior. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 7, CSCW1 (April 2023), 1-21. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3579612 - · DOI · Paper page
  21. [24][24] José-Antonio Cervantes, Sonia López, Luis-Felipe Rodríguez, Salvador Cervantes, Francisco Cervantes, and Félix Ramos. 2020. Artificial Moral Agents: A Survey of the Current Status. Science and Engineering Ethics 26, 2 (April 2020), 501-532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00151-x - · DOI · Paper page
  22. [23][23] Noah Castelo and Miklos Sarvary. 2022. Cross-Cultural Differences in Comfort with Humanlike Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics 14, 8 (October 2022), 1865-1873. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00920-y - · DOI
  23. [25][25] Alan Chan, Maxime Riché, and Jesse Clifton. 2023. Towards the Scalable Evaluation of Cooperativeness in Language Models. arXiv:2303.13360 [cs] - · arXiv
  24. [27][27] Myra Cheng, Alicia DeVrio, Lisa Egede, Su Lin Blodgett, and Alexandra Olteanu. 2024. "I Am the One and Only, Your Cyber BFF": Understanding the Impact of GenAI Requires Understanding the Impact of Anthropomorphic AI. https: //doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.08526 arXiv:2410.08526 - · DOI
  25. [26][26] Kirsten Chapman, Melanie Klimes, Braden Wellman, Garrett Smith, Mainack Mondal, Staci Smith, Yunan Chen, Haijing Hao, and Xinru Page. 2022. A Privacy Paradox? Impact of Privacy Concerns on Willingness to Disclose COVID19 Health Status in the United States. In Companion Publication of the 2022 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing . ACM, Virtual Event Taiwan, 159-162. https://doi.org/10.1145/3500868.3559471 - · DOI
  26. [28][28] Myra Cheng, Kristina Gligoric, Tiziano Piccardi, and Dan Jurafsky. 2024. AnthroScore: A Computational Linguistic Measure of Anthropomorphism. In Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , Yvette Graham and Matthew Purver (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, St. Julian's, Malta, 807-825. -
  27. [29][29] Hyojin Chin, Hyeonho Song, Gumhee Baek, Mingi Shin, Chani Jung, Meeyoung Cha, Junghoi Choi, and Chiyoung Cha. 2023. The Potential of Chatbots for Emotional Support and Promoting Mental Well-Being in Different Cultures: Mixed Methods Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 25 (October 2023), e51712. https://doi.org/10.2196/51712 - · DOI
  28. [30][30] Kyong Ah Cho and Yon Hee Seo. 2024. Dual Mediating Effects of Anxiety to Use and Acceptance Attitude of Artificial Intelligence Technology on the Relationship between Nursing Students' Perception of and Intention to Use Them: A Descriptive Study. BMC Nursing 23, 1 (March 2024), 212. https: //doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01887-z - · DOI
  29. [31][31] Michelle Cohn, Mahima Pushkarna, Gbolahan O. Olanubi, Joseph M. Moran, Daniel Padgett, Zion Mengesha, and Courtney Heldreth. 2024. Believing Anthropomorphism: Examining the Role of Anthropomorphic Cues on Trust in Large Language Models. In Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Honolulu HI USA, 1-15. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3613905.3650818 - · DOI · Paper page
  30. [33][33] Kate Crawford. 2021. Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence . Yale University Press, New Haven. -
  31. [35][35] Stefano DellaVigna, Devin Pope, and Eva Vivalt. 2019. Predict Science to Improve Science. Science 366, 6464 (October 2019), 428-429. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.aaz1704 -
  32. [34][34] Ewart J. De Visser, Samuel S. Monfort, Ryan McKendrick, Melissa A. B. Smith, Patrick E. McKnight, Frank Krueger, and Raja Parasuraman. 2016. Almost Human: Anthropomorphism Increases Trust Resilience in Cognitive Agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 22, 3 (September 2016), 331-349. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000092 - · DOI · Paper page
  33. [36][36] W. Edwards Deming and Frederick F. Stephan. 1940. On a Least Squares Adjustment of a Sampled Frequency Table When the Expected Marginal Totals Are Known. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 11, 4 (1940), 427-444. jstor:2235722 -
  34. [38][38] Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby. 2013. Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming . The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts ; London. -
  35. [37][37] Leonard Dung. 2024. The argument for near-term human disempowerment through AI. AI & SOCIETY (April 2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-02401930-2 - · DOI
  36. [39][39] Upol Ehsan, Q. Vera Liao, Michael Muller, Mark O. Riedl, and Justin D. Weisz. 2021. Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI Systems. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445188 - · DOI · Paper page
  37. [40][40] Upol Ehsan, Koustuv Saha, Munmun De Choudhury, and Mark O. Riedl. 2023. Charting the Sociotechnical Gap in Explainable AI: A Framework to Address the Gap in XAI. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 7, CSCW1 (April 2023), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1145/3579467 - · DOI
  38. [42][42] Madeleine Clare Elish. 2019. Moral Crumple Zones: Cautionary Tales in HumanRobot Interaction. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 5 (March 2019), 40-60. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2019.260 - · DOI · Paper page
  39. [44][44] Mark Fenwick, Wulf A. Kaal, and Erik P. M. Vermeulen. 2016/2017. Regulation Tomorrow: What Happens When Technology Is Faster than the Law. American University Business Law Review 6 (2016/2017), 561. -
  40. [43][43] Nicholas Epley, Adam Waytz, and John T. Cacioppo. 2007. On Seeing Human: A Three-Factor Theory of Anthropomorphism. Psychological Review 114, 4 (2007), 864-886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864 - · DOI · Paper page
  41. [45][45] Ines Fernandez, Nicoleta Kyosovska, Jay Luong, and Gabriel Mukobi. 2024. AI Consciousness and Public Perceptions: Four Futures. http://arxiv.org/abs/2408. 04771 arXiv:2408.04771 [cs]. - · arXiv
  42. [47][47] Nathan G. Freier. 2007. Children Distinguish Conventional from Moral Violations in Interactions with a Personified Agent. In CHI '07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, San Jose CA USA, 2195-2200. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240866.1240979 - · DOI
  43. [46][46] Marlena R. Fraune, Benjamin C. Oisted, Catherine E. Sembrowski, Kathryn A. Gates, Margaret M. Krupp, and Selma Šabanović. 2020. Effects of RobotHuman versus Robot-Robot Behavior and Entitativity on Anthropomorphism and Willingness to Interact. Computers in Human Behavior 105 (April 2020), 106220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106220 - · DOI
  44. [48][48] Nathan G. Freier. 2008. Children Attribute Moral Standing to a Personified Agent. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Florence Italy, 343-352. https://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357113 - · DOI
  45. [50][50] Batya Friedman. 1995. 'It's the Computer's Fault': Reasoning about Computers as Moral Agents. In Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '95 . ACM Press, Denver, Colorado, United States, 226-227. https: //doi.org/10.1145/223355.223537 - · DOI
  46. [49][49] Nathan G. Freier, Elia J. Nelson, Amanda Rotondo, and Wai Kay Kong. 2009. The Moral Accountability of a Personified Agent: Young Adults' Conceptions. In CHI '09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Boston MA USA, 4609-4614. https://doi.org/10.1145/1520340.1520708 - · DOI
  47. [52][52] Andrew Gambino, Jesse Fox, and Rabindra Ratan. 2020. Building a Stronger CASA: Extending the Computers Are Social Actors Paradigm. Human-Machine Communication 1 (February 2020), 71-86. https://doi.org/10.30658/hmc.1.5 - · DOI · Paper page
  48. [54][54] Jean-Christophe Giger, Nuno Piçarra, Patrícia Alves-Oliveira, Raquel Oliveira, and Patrícia Arriaga. 2019. Humanization of Robots: Is It Really Such a Good Idea? Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies 1, 2 (April 2019), 111-123. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.147 - · DOI
  49. [53][53] Robert M. Geraci. 2006. Spiritual Robots: Religion and Our Scientific View of the Natural World. Theology and Science 4, 3 (November 2006), 229-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700600952993 - · DOI
  50. [55][55] Erving Goffman. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience . Harvard University Press, Cambridge. ZSCC: 0033320. -
  51. [57][57] Katja Grace, Harlan Stewart, Julia Fabienne Sandkühler, Stephen Thomas, Ben Weinstein-Raun, and Jan Brauner. 2024. Thousands of AI Authors on the Future of AI. http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.02843 arXiv:2401.02843 [cs]. - · arXiv
  52. [58][58] Heather M. Gray, Kurt Gray, and Daniel M. Wegner. 2007. Dimensions of Mind Perception. Science 315, 5812 (February 2007), 619-619. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1134475 -
  53. [60][60] Kurt Gray, Liane Young, and Adam Waytz. 2012. Mind Perception Is the Essence of Morality. Psychological Inquiry 23, 2 (April 2012), 101-124. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387 - · DOI · Paper page
  54. [61][61] Nina Grgić-Hlača, Christoph Engel, and Krishna P. Gummadi. 2019. Human Decision Making with Machine Assistance: An Experiment on Bailing and Jailing. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (November 2019), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359280 - · DOI · Paper page
  55. [63][63] Johanna Habicht, Sruthi Viswanathan, Ben Carrington, Tobias U. Hauser, Ross Harper, and Max Rollwage. 2024. Closing the Accessibility Gap to Mental Health Treatment with a Personalized Self-Referral Chatbot. Nature Medicine 30, 2 (February 2024), 595-602. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02766-x - · DOI · Paper page
  56. [62][62] Naman Gupta, Sanchari Das, Kate Walsh, and Rahul Chatterjee. 2024. A Critical Analysis of the Prevalence of Technology-Facilitated Abuse in US College Students. In Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Honolulu HI USA, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3613905.3652036 -
  57. [64][64] MDRomael Haque and Sabirat Rubya. 2023. An Overview of Chatbot-Based Mobile Mental Health Apps: Insights From App Description and User Reviews. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 11 (May 2023), e44838. https://doi.org/10.2196/44838 - · DOI · Paper page
  58. [66][66] Jamie Harris and Jacy Reese Anthis. 2021. The Moral Consideration of Artificial Entities: A Literature Review. Science and Engineering Ethics 27, 4 (August 2021), 53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00331-8 - · DOI
  59. [65][65] Maximilian Häring, Eva Gerlitz, Matthew Smith, and Christian Tiefenau. 2023. Less About Privacy: Revisiting a Survey about the German COVID-19 Contact Tracing App. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3544548.3581537 -
  60. [67][67] Fritz Heider and Marianne Simmel. 1944. An Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior. The American Journal of Psychology 57, 2 (April 1944), 243. https: //doi.org/10.2307/1416950 jstor:1416950 - · DOI · Paper page
  61. [69][69] Evelien Heyselaar. 2023. The CASA Theory No Longer Applies to Desktop Computers. Scientific Reports 13, 1 (November 2023), 19693. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41598-023-46527-9 -
  62. [68][68] Franziska Herbert, Steffen Becker, Leonie Schaewitz, Jonas Hielscher, Marvin Kowalewski, Angela Sasse, Yasemin Acar, and Markus Dürmuth. 2023. A World Full of Privacy and Security (Mis)Conceptions? Findings of a Representative Survey in 12 Countries. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1-23. https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3544548.3581410 - · DOI
  63. [70][70] Kevin Anthony Hoff and Masooda Bashir. 2015. Trust in Automation: Integrating Empirical Evidence on Factors That Influence Trust. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 57, 3 (May 2015), 407-434. https: //doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570 - · DOI · Paper page
  64. [72][72] Jess Hohenstein, Rene F. Kizilcec, Dominic DiFranzo, Zhila Aghajari, Hannah Mieczkowski, Karen Levy, Mor Naaman, Jeffrey Hancock, and Malte F. Jung. 2023. Artificial Intelligence in Communication Impacts Language and Social Relationships. Scientific Reports 13, 1 (April 2023), 5487. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41598-023-30938-9 -
  65. [71][71] Jess Hohenstein and Malte Jung. 2020. AI as a Moral Crumple Zone: The Effects of AI-mediated Communication on Attribution and Trust. Computers in Human Behavior 106 (May 2020), 106190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106190 - · DOI · Paper page
  66. [73][73] Yoyo Tsung-Yu Hou, Wen-Ying Lee, and Malte Jung. 2023. 'Should I Follow the Human, or Follow the Robot?' - Robots in Power Can Have More Influence Than Humans on Decision-Making. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1-13. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581066 - · DOI
  67. [75][75] Siying Hu, Hen Chen Yen, Ziwei Yu, Mingjian Zhao, Katie Seaborn, and Can Liu. 2023. Wizundry: A Cooperative Wizard of Oz Platform for Simulating Future Speech-based Interfaces with Multiple Wizards. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 7, CSCW1 (April 2023), 1-34. https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3579591 - · DOI
  68. [76][76] Jie Huang and Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang. 2023. Towards Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Survey. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023 . Association for Computational Linguistics, Toronto, Canada, 1049-1065. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.findings-acl.67 - · DOI · Paper page
  69. [77][77] Saffron Huang, Divya Siddarth, Liane Lovitt, Thomas I. Liao, Esin Durmus, Alex Tamkin, and Deep Ganguli. 2024. Collective Constitutional AI: Aligning a Language Model with Public Input. In The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency . ACM, Rio de Janeiro Brazil, 1395-1417. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3630106.3658979 - · DOI
  70. [81][81] Timothy P. Johnson (Ed.). 2018. Advances in Comparative Survey Methods: Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts (3MC) . John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ. -
  71. [80][80] Ryan Blake Jackson and Tom Williams. 2019. On Perceived Social and Moral Agency in Natural Language Capable Robots. In 2019 HRI Workshop on the Dark Side of Human-Robot Interaction . ACM, Daegu, South Korea, 401-410. -
  72. [82][82] Peter H. Kahn, Batya Friedman, Deanne R. Perez-Granados, and Nathan G. Freier. 2004. Robotic Pets in the Lives of Preschool Children. In CHI '04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Vienna Austria, 14491452. https://doi.org/10.1145/985921.986087 - · DOI
  73. [84][84] Jerry Kaplan. 2016. Defining Artificial Intelligence . Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/wentk/9780190602383.003.0001 - · DOI
  74. [83][83] Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica 47, 2 (March 1979), 263. https://doi.org/10. 2307/1914185 jstor:1914185 -
  75. [85][85] Elise Karinshak, Sunny Xun Liu, Joon Sung Park, and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2023. Working With AI to Persuade: Examining a Large Language Model's Ability to Generate Pro-Vaccination Messages. Proceedings of the ACM on HumanComputer Interaction 7, CSCW1 (April 2023), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3579592 -
  76. [87][87] Sage Kelly, Sherrie-Anne Kaye, and Oscar Oviedo-Trespalacios. 2023. What Factors Contribute to the Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence? A Systematic Review. Telematics and Informatics 77 (February 2023), 101925. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tele.2022.101925 - · DOI
  77. [86][86] Atoosa Kasirzadeh. 2025. Two Types of AI Existential Risk: Decisive and Accumulative. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.07836 arXiv:2401.07836 [cs]. - · DOI
  78. [88][88] Jihyun Kim, Kelly Merrill Jr., Kun Xu, and Stephanie Kelly. 2022. Perceived Credibility of an AI Instructor in Online Education: The Role of Social Presence and Voice Features. Computers in Human Behavior 136 (November 2022), 107383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107383 - · DOI
  79. [90][90] Marcus Kneer, David Colaço, Joshua Alexander, and Edouard Machery. 2021. On Second Thought: Reflections on the Reflection Defense. In Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy . -
  80. [89][89] Taenyun Kim, Maria D. Molina, Minjin (Mj) Rheu, Emily S. Zhan, and Wei Peng. 2023. One AI Does Not Fit All: A Cluster Analysis of the Laypeople's Perception of AI Roles. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3544548.3581340 -
  81. [91][91] Takanori Komatsu. 2016. How Do People Judge Moral Wrongness in a Robot and in Its Designers and Owners Regarding the Consequences of the Robot's Behaviors?. In 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) . IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 1168-1171. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745256 - · DOI
  82. [93][93] Elisa Konya-Baumbach, Miriam Biller, and Sergej Von Janda. 2023. Someone out There? A Study on the Social Presence of Anthropomorphized Chatbots. Computers in Human Behavior 139 (February 2023), 107513. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.chb.2022.107513 -
  83. [92][92] Takanori Komatsu, Bertram F. Malle, and Matthias Scheutz. 2021. Blaming the Reluctant Robot: Parallel Blame Judgments for Robots in Moral Dilemmas across U.S. and Japan. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction . ACM, Boulder CO USA, 63-72. https://doi.org/10. 1145/3434073.3444672 -
  84. [94][94] Jan Kulveit, Raymond Douglas, Nora Ammann, Deger Turan, David Krueger, and David Duvenaud. 2025. Gradual Disempowerment: Systemic Existential Risks from Incremental AI Development. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.16946 arXiv:2501.16946 [cs]. - · DOI
  85. [96][96] Ali Ladak, Jamie Harris, and Jacy Reese Anthis. 2023. Features of Moral Consideration for Artificial Entities: A Conjoint Experiment . Preprint. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/235vp - · DOI
  86. [95][95] Ali Ladak. 2023. What Would Qualify an Artificial Intelligence for Moral Standing? AI and Ethics (January 2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-02300260-1 - · DOI
  87. [97][97] Ali Ladak, Jamie Harris, and Jacy Reese Anthis. 2024. Which Artificial Intelligences Do People Care About Most? A Conjoint Experiment on Moral Consideration. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Honolulu HI USA, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3613904.3642403 -
  88. [99][99] Simon M. Laham. 2009. Expanding the Moral Circle: Inclusion and Exclusion Mindsets and the Circle of Moral Regard. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45, 1 (January 2009), 250-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.08. 012 - · DOI
  89. [100][100] David R. Large, Kyle Harrington, Gary Burnett, Jacob Luton, Peter Thomas, and Pete Bennett. 2019. To Please in a Pod: Employing an Anthropomorphic AgentInterlocutor to Enhance Trust and User Experience in an Autonomous, SelfDriving Vehicle. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications . ACM, Utrecht Netherlands, 49-59. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342197.3344545 - · DOI · Paper page
  90. [102][102] Minha Lee, Peter Ruijten, Lily Frank, Yvonne De Kort, and Wijnand IJsselsteijn. 2021. People May Punish, But Not Blame Robots. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445284 - · DOI
  91. [101][101] Sarah Lebovitz, Natalia Levina, and Hila Lifshitz-Assa. 2021. Is AI Ground Truth Really True? The Dangers of Training and Evaluating AI Tools Based on Experts' Know-What. MIS Quarterly 45, 3 (September 2021), 1501-1526. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/16564 - · DOI · Paper page
  92. [103][103] Yi-Chieh Lee, Naomi Yamashita, and Yun Huang. 2020. Designing a Chatbot as a Mediator for Promoting Deep Self-Disclosure to a Real Mental Health Professional. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW1 (May 2020), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3392836 - · DOI
  93. [105][105] Gabriel Lima, Nina Grgić-Hlača, and Meeyoung Cha. 2021. Human Perceptions on Moral Responsibility of AI: A Case Study in AI-Assisted Bail Decision-Making. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445260 - · DOI
  94. [104][104] Xinge Li and Yongjun Sung. 2021. Anthropomorphism Brings Us Closer: The Mediating Role of Psychological Distance in User-AI Assistant Interactions. Computers in Human Behavior 118 (May 2021), 106680. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.chb.2021.106680 -
  95. [106][106] Gabriel Lima, Nina Grgić-Hlača, and Meeyoung Cha. 2023. Blaming Humans and Machines: What Shapes People's Reactions to Algorithmic Harm. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580953 - · DOI
  96. [108][108] Ewa Luger and Abigail Sellen. 2016. "Like Having a Really Bad PA": The Gulf between User Expectation and Experience of Conversational Agents. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, San Jose California USA, 5286-5297. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036. 2858288 - · DOI
  97. [107][107] Gabriel Lima, Changyeon Kim, Seungho Ryu, Chihyung Jeon, and Meeyoung Cha. 2020. Collecting the Public Perception of AI and Robot Rights. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW2 (October 2020), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3415206 - · DOI · Paper page
  98. [109][109] Takuya Maeda and Anabel Quan-Haase. 2024. When Human-AI Interactions Become Parasocial: Agency and Anthropomorphism in Affective Design. In The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency . ACM, Rio de Janeiro Brazil, 1068-1077. https://doi.org/10.1145/3630106.3658956 - · DOI · Paper page
  99. [111][111] Bertram F. Malle, Stuti Thapa Magar, and Matthias Scheutz. 2019. AI in the Sky: How People Morally Evaluate Human and Machine Decisions in a Lethal Strike Dilemma. In Robotics and Well-Being , Maria Isabel Aldinhas Ferreira, João Silva Sequeira, Gurvinder Singh Virk, Mohammad Osman Tokhi, and Endre E. Kadar (Eds.). Vol. 95. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 111-133. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12524-0\_11 - · DOI
  100. [110][110] Bertram F Malle. 2019. How Many Dimensions of Mind Perception Really Are There?. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society . Cognitive Science Society, Montreal, Canada, 2268-2274. -
  101. [112][112] Bethanie Maples, Merve Cerit, Aditya Vishwanath, and Roy Pea. 2024. Loneliness and Suicide Mitigation for Students Using GPT3-enabled Chatbots. npj Mental Health Research 3, 1 (January 2024), 4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44184-02300047-6 - · DOI
  102. [113][113] Bethanie Maples, Roy D. Pea, and David Markowitz. 2023. Learning from Intelligent Social Agents as Social and Intellectual Mirrors. In AI in Learning: Designing the Future , Hannele Niemi, Roy D. Pea, and Yu Lu (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 73-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-03109687-7\_5 - · DOI
  103. [115][115] Thomas Metzinger. 2021. Artificial Suffering: An Argument for a Global Moratorium on Synthetic Phenomenology. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness 08, 01 (March 2021), 43-66. https://doi.org/10.1142/ S270507852150003X -
  104. [114][114] Daniel McDuff and Mary Czerwinski. 2018. Designing Emotionally Sentient Agents. Commun. ACM 61, 12 (November 2018), 74-83. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3186591 -
  105. [116][116] Fred Miao, Irina V. Kozlenkova, Haizhong Wang, Tao Xie, and Robert W. Palmatier. 2022. An Emerging Theory of Avatar Marketing. Journal of Marketing 86, 1 (January 2022), 67-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242921996646 - · DOI · Paper page
  106. [118][118] Swati Mishra and Jeffrey M. Rzeszotarski. 2021. Crowdsourcing and Evaluating Concept-driven Explanations of Machine Learning Models. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (April 2021), 1-26. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3449213 - · DOI
  107. [117][117] Milagros Miceli and Julian Posada. 2022. The Data-Production Dispositif. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW2 (November 2022), 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555561 - · DOI
  108. [119][119] Meredith Ringel Morris, Michael S. Bernstein, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Juho Kim, and Andrés Monroy-Hernández. Forthcoming. Is Human-AI Interaction CSCW? CSCW'24Companion: Companion Publication of the 2023 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Forthcoming). -
  109. [121][121] Clifford Nass and Youngme Moon. 2000. Machines and Mindlessness: Social Responses to Computers. Journal of Social Issues 56, 1 (January 2000), 81-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00153 - · DOI · Paper page
  110. [120][120] Sara Moussawi, Marios Koufaris, and Raquel Benbunan-Fich. 2021. How Perceptions of Intelligence and Anthropomorphism Affect Adoption of Personal Intelligent Agents. Electronic Markets 31, 2 (2021), 343-364. -
  111. [122][122] Clifford Nass, Jonathan Steuer, and Ellen R. Tauber. 1994. Computers Are Social Actors. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Celebrating Interdependence - CHI '94 . ACM Press, Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 72-78. https://doi.org/10.1145/191666.191703 - · DOI · Paper page
  112. [124][124] Richard Ngo, Lawrence Chan, and Sören Mindermann. 2023. The Alignment Problem from a Deep Learning Perspective. arXiv:2209.00626 [cs] - · arXiv
  113. [125][125] Mai Nguyen, Lars-Erik Casper Ferm, Sara Quach, Nicolas Pontes, and Park Thaichon. 2023. Chatbots in Frontline Services and Customer Experience: An Anthropomorphism Perspective. Psychology & Marketing (August 2023), mar.21882. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21882 - · DOI · Paper page
  114. [126][126] Sarah Soyeon Oh, Kyoung-A Kim, Minsu Kim, Jaeuk Oh, Sang Hui Chu, and JiYeon Choi. 2021. Measurement of Digital Literacy Among Older Adults: Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 23, 2 (February 2021), e26145. https://doi.org/10.2196/26145 - · DOI
  115. [128][128] Sharon Oviatt. 2006. Human-Centered Design Meets Cognitive Load Theory: Designing Interfaces That Help People Think. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Multimedia . ACM, Santa Barbara CA USA, 871-880. https://doi.org/10.1145/1180639.1180831 - · DOI
  116. [130][130] Janet V.T. Pauketat and Jacy Reese Anthis. 2022. Predicting the moral consideration of artificial intelligences. Computers in Human Behavior 136 (Nov. 2022), 107372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107372 3 citations (Semantic Scholar/DOI) [2023-06-28]. - · DOI · Paper page
  117. [129][129] Gain Park, Jiyun Chung, and Seyoung Lee. 2024. Human vs. Machine-like Representation in Chatbot Mental Health Counseling: The Serial Mediation of Psychological Distance and Trust on Compliance Intention. Current Psychology 43, 5 (February 2024), 4352-4363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04653-7 - · DOI
  118. [131][131] Janet V.T. Pauketat, Ali Ladak, and Jacy Reese Anthis. 2025. Worldmaking for a future with sentient AI. British Journal of Social Psychology 64, 1 (2025), e12844. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12844 \_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/bjso.12844. - · DOI
  119. [134][134] Matthew Wray Perry. 2024. Why Sentience Should Be the Only Basis of Moral Status. The Journal of Ethics (July 2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-02409487-4 - · DOI
  120. [135][135] Séamus A. Power, Tania Zittoun, Sanne Akkerman, Brady Wagoner, Martina Cabra, Flora Cornish, Hana Hawlina, Brett Heasman, Kesi Mahendran, Charis Psaltis, Antti Rajala, Angela Veale, and Alex Gillespie. 2023. Social Psychology of and for World-Making. Personality and Social Psychology Review 27, 4 (November 2023), 378-392. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683221145756 Publications ; Cambridge University Press, Stanford, Calif. : New York. - · DOI
  121. [141][141] Susanna Kim Ripken. 2009. Corporations Are People Too: A Multi-dimensional Approach to the Corporate Personhood Puzzle. Fordham Journal of Corporate and Financial Law 15 (2009). -
  122. [140][140] Kathleen Richardson. 2016. Technological Animism: The Uncanny Personhood of Humanoid Machines. Social Analysis 60, 1 (January 2016). https://doi.org/10. 3167/sa.2016.600108 -
  123. [142][142] Jason Roy, Shane P. Singh, and Patrick Fournier. 2021. The Power of Polls?: A Cross-National Experimental Analysis of the Effects of Campaign Polls. Elements in Campaigns and Elections (September 2021). https://doi.org/10. 1017/9781108877428 -
  124. [143][143] Jason Roy, Shane P. Singh, Patrick Fournier, and Blake Andrew. 2015. An Experimental Analysis of the Impact of Campaign Polls on Electoral Information Seeking. Electoral Studies 40 (December 2015), 146-157. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.electstud.2015.08.005 -
  125. [145][145] Osamu Sakura. 2022. Robot and Ukiyo-e: Implications to Cultural Varieties in Human-Robot Relationships. AI & SOCIETY 37, 4 (December 2022), 1563-1573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01243-8 - · DOI
  126. [148][148] Mike Savage. 2024. In defence of sociological description: A 'world-making' perspective. The British Journal of Sociology 75, 3 (2024), 360-365. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.13083 \_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1468-4446.13083. - · DOI
  127. [150][150] Eric Schwitzgebel. 2023. AI Systems Must Not Confuse Users about Their Sentience or Moral Status. Patterns 4, 8 (August 2023), 100818. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.patter.2023.100818 - · DOI · Paper page
  128. [149][149] Howard Schuman and Stanley Presser. 1981. Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context . Academic Press, New York. -
  129. [151][151] Eric Schwitzgebel and Mara Garza. 2015. A Defense of the Rights of Artificial Intelligences: Defense of the Rights of Artificial Intelligences. Midwest Studies In Philosophy 39, 1 (September 2015), 98-119. https://doi.org/10.1111/misp.12032 - · DOI
  130. [153][153] Martin E. P. Seligman and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 2000. Positive Psychology: An Introduction. American Psychologist 55, 1 (2000), 5-14. https://doi.org/10. 1037/0003-066X.55.1.5 -
  131. [152][152] Ava Elizabeth Scott, Daniel Neumann, Jasmin Niess, and Paweł W. Woźniak. 2023. Do You Mind? User Perceptions of Machine Consciousness. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581296 - · DOI · Paper page
  132. [154][154] William Seymour and Max Van Kleek. 2020. Does Siri Have a Soul? Exploring Voice Assistants Through Shinto Design Fictions. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Honolulu HI USA, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3381809 - · DOI · Paper page
  133. [155][155] Ben Shneiderman, Catherine Plaisant, Maxine Cohen, Steven M. Jacobs, and Niklas Elmqvist. 2017. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective HumanComputer Interaction (sixth edition ed.). Pearson, Boston. -
  134. [157][157] J. P. Singh. 1999. Leapfrogging Development? The Political Economy of Telecommunications Restructuring . State University of New York Press, Albany. -
  135. [159][159] Robert Sparrow. 2007. Killer Robots. Journal of Applied Philosophy 24, 1 (February 2007), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2007.00346.x - · DOI · Paper page
  136. [160][160] Patric R. Spence, Autumn Edwards, and Chad Edwards. 2018. Attitudes, Prior Interaction, and Petitioner Credibility Predict Support for Considering the Rights of Robots. In Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction . ACM, Chicago IL USA, 243-244. https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3173386.3177071 - · DOI
  137. [162][162] Vasant Srinivasan and Leila Takayama. 2016. Help Me Please: Robot Politeness Strategies for Soliciting Help From Humans. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, San Jose California USA, 4945-4955. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858217 - · DOI
  138. [161][161] Steven J. Spencer, Christine Logel, and Paul G. Davies. 2016. Stereotype Threat. Annual Review of Psychology 67, 1 (January 2016), 415-437. https://doi.org/10. 1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235 -
  139. [163][163] MeganStrait, Lara Vujovic, Victoria Floerke, Matthias Scheutz, and Heather Urry. 2015. Too Much Humanness for Human-Robot Interaction: Exposure to Highly Humanlike Robots Elicits Aversive Responding in Observers. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Seoul Republic of Korea, 3593-3602. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702415 - · DOI
  140. [164][164] Michael T. Stuart and Markus Kneer. 2021. Guilty Artificial Minds: Folk Attributions of Mens Rea and Culpability to Artificially Intelligent Agents. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (October 2021), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479507 - · DOI
  141. [166][166] Miriam E. Sweeney. 2016. The Ms. Dewey "Experience": Technoculture, Gender, and Race. In Digital Sociologies . Policy Press, 401-420. -
  142. [168][168] Jagadish Thaker, Xiaoquan Zhao, and Anthony Leiserowitz. 2017. Media Use and Public Perceptions of Global Warming in India. Environmental Communication 11, 3 (May 2017), 353-369. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2016.1269824 - · DOI
  143. [169][169] Sam Thellman, Maartje De Graaf, and Tom Ziemke. 2022. Mental State Attribution to Robots: A Systematic Review of Conceptions, Methods, and Findings. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 11, 4 (December 2022), 1-51. https://doi.org/10.1145/3526112 - · DOI
  144. [172][172] Chandan Kumar Tiwari, Mohd Abass Bhat, Shagufta Tariq Khan, Rajaswaminathan Subramaniam, and Mohammad Atif Irshad Khan. 2023. What Drives Students toward ChatGPT? An Investigation of the Factors Influencing Adoption and Usage of ChatGPT. Interactive Technology and Smart Education 21, 3 (August 2023), 333-355. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-04-2023-0061 - · DOI · Paper page
  145. [174][174] Kallie Tzelios, Lisa A. Williams, John Omerod, and Eliza Bliss-Moreau. 2022. Evidence of the Unidimensional Structure of Mind Perception. Scientific Reports 12, 1 (November 2022), 18978. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23047-6 - · DOI
  146. [173][173] Suzanne Tolmeijer, Markus Christen, Serhiy Kandul, Markus Kneer, and Abraham Bernstein. 2022. Capable but Amoral? Comparing AI and Human Expert Collaboration in Ethical Decision Making. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, New Orleans LA USA, 1-17. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517732 - · DOI · Paper page
  147. [175][175] Qiaosi Wang, Koustuv Saha, Eric Gregori, David Joyner, and Ashok Goel. 2021. Towards Mutual Theory of Mind in Human-AI Interaction: How Language Reflects What Students Perceive About a Virtual Teaching Assistant. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445645 - · DOI · Paper page
  148. [177][177] Adam Waytz, Kurt Gray, Nicholas Epley, and Daniel M. Wegner. 2010. Causes and Consequences of Mind Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14, 8 (August 2010), 383-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.006 - · DOI · Paper page
  149. [176][176] Xijing Wang and Eva G. Krumhuber. 2018. Mind Perception of Robots Varies With Their Economic Versus Social Function. Frontiers in Psychology 9 (July 2018), 1230. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01230 - · DOI
  150. [178][178] Adam Waytz, Joy Heafner, and Nicholas Epley. 2014. The Mind in the Machine: Anthropomorphism Increases Trust in an Autonomous Vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 52 (May 2014), 113-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jesp.2014.01.005 -
  151. [180][180] Blay Whitby. 2008. Sometimes It's Hard to Be a Robot: A Call for Action on the Ethics of Abusing Artificial Agents. Interacting with Computers 20, 3 (May 2008), 326-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2008.02.002 - · DOI
  152. [179][179] Kara Weisman, Carol S. Dweck, and Ellen M. Markman. 2017. Rethinking People's Conceptions of Mental Life. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 43 (October 2017), 11374-11379. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1704347114 - · DOI
  153. [183][183] Xuhai Xu, Anna Yu, Tanya R. Jonker, Kashyap Todi, Feiyu Lu, Xun Qian, João Marcelo Evangelista Belo, Tianyi Wang, Michelle Li, Aran Mun, TeYen Wu, Junxiao Shen, Ting Zhang, Narine Kokhlikyan, Fulton Wang, Paul Sorenson, Sophie Kim, and Hrvoje Benko. 2023. XAIR: A Framework of Explainable AI in Augmented Reality. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581500 - · DOI
  154. [182][182] Susan Wyche. 2022. Reimagining the Mobile Phone: Investigating Speculative Approaches to Design in Human-Computer Interaction for Development (HCI4D). Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW2 (November 2022), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555648 - · DOI
  155. [184][184] Heather Hee Jin Yang, Nathanael Fast, Christian Hildebrand, Donna Hoffman, Jennifer Marie Logg, Heather Hee Jin Yang, and Michael Yeomans. 2020. Resisting Artificial Intelligence: When Do Decision-Makers Avoid or Use Algorithmic Input? Academy of Management Proceedings 2020, 1 (August 2020), 17721. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.17721symposium - · DOI
  156. [185][185] Yaqing Yang, Tony W Li, and Haojian Jin. 2024. On the Feasibility of Predicting Users' Privacy Concerns Using Contextual Labels and Personal Preferences. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Honolulu HI USA, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642500 - · DOI
  157. [189][189] Robert B. Zajonc. 1968. Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9, 2, Pt.2 (1968), 1-27. https://doi.org/10. 1037/h0025848 -
  158. [190][190] Alice Qian Zhang, Ryland Shaw, Jacy Reese Anthis, Ashlee Milton, Emily Tseng, Jina Suh, Lama Ahmad, Ram Shankar Siva Kumar, Julian Posada, Benjamin Shestakofsky, Sarah T. Roberts, and Mary L. Gray. 2024. The Human Factor in AI Red Teaming: Perspectives from Social and Collaborative Computing. https://doi.org/10.1145/3678884.3687147 arXiv:2407.07786 [cs] - [192] John Zoshak and Kristin Dew. 2021. Beyond Kant and Bentham: How Ethical Theories Are Being Used in Artificial Moral Agents. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445102 - · DOI
  159. [191][191] Yixuan Zhang, Yimeng Wang, Nutchanon Yongsatianchot, Joseph D Gaggiano, Nurul M Suhaimi, Anne Okrah, Miso Kim, Jacqueline Griffin, and Andrea G Parker. 2024. Profiling the Dynamics of Trust & Distrust in Social Media: A Survey Study. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Honolulu HI USA, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3613904.3642927

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Anthis, J. R., Pauketat, J. V. T., Ladak, A., & Manoli, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (DE)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
Pages
1-22
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2407.08867
arXiv
2407.08867
OpenAlex
W4409746363
Cited by
24
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 8
FWCI
24.38
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Law › Literary and Philosophical Studies
Keywords
sentient AI, mind perception, public attitudes toward AI, artificial intelligence forecasting, digital mind, AI safety

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