However, people do nonetheless assign robots agency, intentionality, and blame ( Sciutti et al., 2013 De Graaf and Malle, 2019 Banks, 2020). Compared to people, current robots are less agentic and autonomous with behaviors driven by programming, design, and humans in the loop. When communicating with machines such as social robots, people must form impressions of the agents and judge their behavior. 319).Īlthough this effect has been thoroughly examined with humans, we do not know if the same correspondence bias will apply to social robots. However, “because people are accustomed to seeing individuals as causal agents, viewing the actor and (their) actions as forming a single categorical unit also appears to be the simplest, most satisfying, and least effortful inferential strategy ( Heider and Simmel, 1944 Heider, 1958 Jones, 1979)” ( Forgas, 1998, p. Individual behavior is heavily influenced and guided by situational and external factors. As such, an observer will likely attribute reasons for a behavior to internal characteristics and not external factors ( Gilbert and Jones, 1986). In other words, people sometimes demonstrate a cognitive bias by inferring that a person’s actions depend on what “kind” of person they are rather than on the social and environmental forces that influence the person. The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) is the tendency for people to over-emphasize dispositional or personality-based explanations for others’ behavior while under-emphasizing situational explanations ( Ross, 1977). Implications of attributing robot behavior to disposition, or conflating robot actors with their actions, are addressed. Judges formed more generous impressions of the robot agent when its unpopular behavior was coerced versus chosen a tendency not displayed when forming impressions of the human agent. Results demonstrated some differences in the global impressions of humans and robots based on behavior valence and choice. However, they committed a stronger correspondence bias in the case of the robot–an effect driven by the greater dispositional culpability assigned to robots committing unpopular behavior–and they were more confident in their attitudinal judgments of robots than humans. Results of an experiment showed that participants made correspondent inferences when evaluating both human and robot speakers, attributing their behavior to underlying attitudes even when it was clearly coerced. Nonetheless, people do assign robots agency, intentionality, personality, and blame. This effect has been thoroughly examined with humans, but do people make the same causal inferences when interpreting the actions of a robot? As compared to people, social robots are less autonomous and agentic because their behavior is wholly determined by humans in the loop, programming, and design choices. The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE, sometimes referred to as the correspondence bias) is the tendency for individuals to over-emphasize personality-based or dispositional explanations for other people’s behavior while under-emphasizing situational explanations. Increasingly, people interact with embodied machine communicators and are challenged to understand their natures and behaviors.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |