Record STMT-W55327BAdvisory

Ethics of Corporeal, Co-present Robots as Agents of Influence: a Review

Report ProfessionalGlobalin forceNot AI-specific

This review paper examines the unique ethical challenges posed by the corporeality, physical presence, and interaction modalities of robots, distinguishing roboethics issues from broader AI ethics. The authors review recent findings in human-robot interaction (HRI), focusing on how physical presence, touch, and movement can influence human behavior and agency. They emphasize that these physical and spatial dynamics require dedicated ethical considerations during robot design, independent of the software or artificial intelligence implemented inside the system.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

SpringerIndustry

Publisher

Legal forceAdvisory

Under whose authorityProfessional

Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Researchers and academicsGeneral publicCompaniesAI developers and providers

Researchers, designers, and ethicists working at the intersection of robotics, human-robot interaction, and technology ethics.

Sectors

Research and science · robotics and human-robot interaction researchCross-sector

What the document contains

What's covered

The document covers the ethical implications of interactive, corporeal, and co-present robots, examining how physical presence, appearance, touch, and movement influence human behavior, conformity, and agency independently of onboard artificial intelligence.

What's missing

The text does not provide legally binding regulatory frameworks, binding legislation, or specific administrative enforcement mechanisms for robot design.

Key takeaways

The corporeality and physical co-presence of robots create unique ethical challenges that go beyond standard artificial intelligence ethics.
Human responses to robots are heavily influenced by a robot's physical presence, appearance, touch, and movement in shared physical spaces.
Design strategies like making home robots cute can function as dark patterns that manipulate user trust and data collection.
Physical interaction modalities such as touch and movement entrainment can directly affect human agency and interpersonal dynamics.
Incorporating ethics into robot design requires evaluating not only algorithmic decisions, but also physical morphology, placement, and communication modalities.

Principles it states

Human frailty is always to be respected, both physical and psychological.Avoid racist, sexist, and ableist morphologies and behaviors in robot design.

Outline

· Abstract
· Introduction
· Ethical Implications Arising from Interaction with Robots
· Physical Presence and Appearance
· Touch
· Movements and Nonverbal Expressions
· Incorporating Ethics into Interactive Robot Design
· Conclusion

Issued24 March 2021

Length5,724 words · 7 pages

FormatNot recorded

Scopeglobal

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Accountability

0/5

Clear responsibility for AI outcomes

screening score · 2026-10-24

Human Dignity

3/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

Human frailty is always to be respected, both physical and psychological

Incorporating Ethics into Interactive Robot Design

screening score · 2026-10-24

Transparency

0/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

screening score · 2026-10-24

Enforcement

0/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

screening score · 2026-10-24

Impact Assessment

2/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

these issues should be considered in the design irrespective of and in addition to the ethics of artificial intelligence implemented in them.

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Topics

Physical AI Governancecontext

human_robot_interaction robot_ethics embodied_ai nonverbal_communication social_influence