Back to the database
Record STMT-WB05689Advisory

The Concept of [Friendliness] in Robotics: Ethical Challenges

Report Institutional policyGlobalin force

This academic chapter examines the ethical challenges surrounding the concept of friendliness in socially interactive robots. It analyzes how embodied, autonomous, and mobile robots create the illusion of affective reciprocity through human-like social behaviors and expressions. The paper discusses the philosophical and moral implications of fostering simulated friendship between humans and machines.

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

Who issued it

SpringerIndustry
Publisher
Legal forceAdvisory
Under whose authorityInstitutional policy
Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Researchers and academicsGeneral publicAI developers and providers

Researchers and developers in human-robot interaction and robot ethics should read this to understand the moral implications of implementing friendliness in artificial intelligence.

Sectors
Research and science · robotics researchCross-sector

What the document contains

What's covered

The text covers the ethical challenges of designing socially interactive robots that exhibit friendliness and emotional behaviors. It discusses how robots create illusions of affective reciprocity and human-like interaction.

What's missing

The document does not contain regulatory mandates, legal enforcement mechanisms, or formal codes of conduct.

Key takeaways
  • Socially interactive robots are embodied, autonomous, and mobile technologies that operate in human social environments.
  • Robots display behaviors such as recognizing faces and making eye contact that lead humans to perceive them as sentient.
  • Simulated social behaviors create the illusion of interaction with a living being capable of affective reciprocity.
  • The paper explores the ethical issues emerging from designing friendliness and emotional responses in robotic systems.
Issued17 April 2019
Length1,024 words
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

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Fairness

0/5

Non-discrimination and equitable treatment

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Human Dignity

0/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Human Oversight

0/5

Humans remain in control of consequential decisions

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Privacy

0/5

Protection of personal data and private life

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Transparency

0/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Enforcement

0/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Impact Assessment

0/5

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

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-24

Topics

social_robotics robot_friendliness machine_ethics human_robot_interaction deception