The impact of action descriptions on attribution of moral responsibility towards robots.

IF 3.9 2区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Ziggy O'Reilly, Serena Marchesi, Agnieszka Wykowska
{"title":"The impact of action descriptions on attribution of moral responsibility towards robots.","authors":"Ziggy O'Reilly, Serena Marchesi, Agnieszka Wykowska","doi":"10.1038/s41598-024-79027-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the era of renewed fascination with AI and robotics, one needs to address questions related to their societal impact, particularly in terms of moral responsibility and intentionality. In seven vignette-based experiments we investigated whether the consequences of a robot or human's actions, influenced participant's intentionality and moral responsibility ratings. For the robot, when the vignettes contained mentalistic descriptions, moral responsibility ratings were higher for negative actions consequences than positive action consequences, however, there was no difference in intentionality ratings. Whereas, for the human, both moral responsibility and intentionality ratings were higher for negative action consequences. Once the mentalistic descriptions were removed from the vignettes and the moral responsibility question was clarified, we found a reversed asymmetry. For both robots and humans, participants attributed more intentionality and praise, for positive action consequences than negative action consequences. We suggest that this reversal could be due to people defaulting to charitable explanations, when explicit references to culpable mental states are removed from the vignettes.</p>","PeriodicalId":21811,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Reports","volume":"15 1","pages":"4128"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791197/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Reports","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-79027-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the era of renewed fascination with AI and robotics, one needs to address questions related to their societal impact, particularly in terms of moral responsibility and intentionality. In seven vignette-based experiments we investigated whether the consequences of a robot or human's actions, influenced participant's intentionality and moral responsibility ratings. For the robot, when the vignettes contained mentalistic descriptions, moral responsibility ratings were higher for negative actions consequences than positive action consequences, however, there was no difference in intentionality ratings. Whereas, for the human, both moral responsibility and intentionality ratings were higher for negative action consequences. Once the mentalistic descriptions were removed from the vignettes and the moral responsibility question was clarified, we found a reversed asymmetry. For both robots and humans, participants attributed more intentionality and praise, for positive action consequences than negative action consequences. We suggest that this reversal could be due to people defaulting to charitable explanations, when explicit references to culpable mental states are removed from the vignettes.

行为描述对机器人道德责任归因的影响。
在对人工智能和机器人重新着迷的时代,人们需要解决与它们的社会影响相关的问题,特别是在道德责任和意向性方面。在七个基于小插曲的实验中,我们调查了机器人或人类行为的后果是否会影响参与者的意向性和道德责任评级。对于机器人来说,当小片段包含心理描述时,消极行为后果的道德责任评分高于积极行为后果的道德责任评分,然而,意向性评分没有差异。然而,对于人类来说,道德责任和意向性评分在消极行为后果中都更高。一旦心理主义的描述从插图中删除,道德责任问题得到澄清,我们发现了一个相反的不对称。无论是机器人还是人类,参与者都认为积极行为的结果比消极行为的结果更具意向性和赞美。我们认为,这种逆转可能是由于人们默认了善意的解释,当明确提到有罪的精神状态从插图中删除时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Scientific Reports
Scientific Reports Natural Science Disciplines-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
19567
审稿时长
3.9 months
期刊介绍: We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections. Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021). •Engineering Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world''s biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live. •Physical sciences Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics. •Earth and environmental sciences Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems. •Biological sciences Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants. •Health sciences The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信