IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v189y2023ics0040162523000616.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Entertainment vs. manipulation: Personalized human-robot interaction between user experience and ethical design

Author

Listed:
  • Pollmann, Kathrin
  • Loh, Wulf
  • Fronemann, Nora
  • Ziegler, Daniel

Abstract

A personalized human-robot interaction (HRI) can increase the acceptance of robots through positive effects on the user experience (UX), as well as the user's attitude towards and perception of the robot. From an ethical perspective, however, personalized HRI poses certain risks with regard to autonomy and manipulation of the users. Taking the scenario of a personalized quizmaster robot as an example, this paper combines the user-centered design of a personalized robot behavior with ethical design perspectives. Based on motivation strategies of the robot quiz master, the paper assesses and generalizes which interaction behaviors may be ethically permissible and at the same time enjoyable, engaging and motivating. Balancing the two perspectives of UX and ethical design, we propose transferable recommendations for the design of personalized HRI based on the approach of cascading models of design.

Suggested Citation

  • Pollmann, Kathrin & Loh, Wulf & Fronemann, Nora & Ziegler, Daniel, 2023. "Entertainment vs. manipulation: Personalized human-robot interaction between user experience and ethical design," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:189:y:2023:i:c:s0040162523000616
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122376
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162523000616
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122376?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susser, Daniel & Roessler, Beate & Nissenbaum, Helen, 2019. "Technology, autonomy, and manipulation," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 8(2), pages 1-22.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dang, Ngoc Bich & Bertrandias, Laurent, 2023. "Social robots as healing aids: How and why powerlessness influences the intention to adopt social robots," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    2. Fink, Matthias & Maresch, Daniela & Gartner, Johannes, 2023. "Programmed to do good: The categorical imperative as a key to moral behavior of social robots," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Ding, Bin & Li, Yameng & Miah, Shah & Liu, Wei, 2024. "Customer acceptance of frontline social robots—Human-robot interaction as boundary condition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Burkell, Jacquelyn & Regan, Priscilla M., 2019. "Voter preferences, voter manipulation, voter analytics: policy options for less surveillance and more autonomy," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 8(4), pages 1-24.
    2. Fabiana Di Porto & Marialuisa Zuppetta, 2021. "Co-regulating algorithmic disclosure for digital platforms [Theorizing regulatory intermediaries]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 272-293.
    3. Dobber, Tom & Ó Fathaigh, Ronan & Zuiderveen Borgesius, Frederik J., 2019. "The regulation of online political micro-targeting in Europe," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 8(4), pages 1-20.
    4. Lena Bjørlo & Øystein Moen & Mark Pasquine, 2021. "The Role of Consumer Autonomy in Developing Sustainable AI: A Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    5. M. Brenncke, 2024. "A Theory of Exploitation for Consumer Law: Online Choice Architectures, Dark Patterns, and Autonomy Violations," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 127-164, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:189:y:2023:i:c:s0040162523000616. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.