Who Owns The Robot?: Four Ethical and Socio-technical Questions about Wellbeing Robots in the Real World through Community Engagement
This research paper examines the ethical and socio-technical questions surrounding the real-world deployment of wellbeing robots through community-centered workshops with under-represented groups. The authors analyze qualitative data to identify key themes regarding physical and emotional safety, cultural bias, data privacy, and the functional role of social robots. Ultimately, the paper provides a framework of four guiding questions that roboticists should address to align robot development with the public interest.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Roboticists, AI researchers, and ethicists should read this to understand community perspectives and integrate ethical reflections into robot design and deployment.
What the document contains
The document addresses ethical and socio-technical dimensions of real-world wellbeing robots through community engagement workshops. It covers safety concerns, cultural and design biases, data privacy, and the philosophical justification for using robots in mental health contexts.
The text does not provide binding regulatory mandates, legislative enforcement mechanisms, or formal technical standards for commercial robot manufacturing.
- Real-world deployment of wellbeing robots raises critical ethical concerns regarding physical and psychological safety, particularly for vulnerable populations like children.
- Robotic technologies often reflect Western-centric and engineering-driven biases, failing to adequately account for cultural diversity, intersectional identities, and accessibility.
- Sensitive data collection by wellbeing robots introduces severe privacy risks, unclear ownership structures, and regulatory ambiguities, especially when deployed in environments like workplaces.
- Anthropomorphic robot designs can create unrealistic expectations and emotional over-reliance, necessitating clear functional boundaries and improved user transparency.
· Abstract · 1 Introduction · 2 Background and Related Work · 3 Methodology · 4 The Identified Ethical Questions - 4.1 Is It Safe and How Can We Know That? - 4.2 Who Is the Robot Built For and With? - 4.3 Who Owns the Robot and the Data? - 4.4 Why a Robot? · 5 Discussion: Critical Look and Future Work · 6 Conclusion
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
2/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
3) Who owns the robot and the data?, and 4) Why a robot?
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Oversight
2/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
we argue that a robot should not be performing a therapeutic role in which trauma is discussed, without supervision from a human psychologist or therapist
4.4 Why a Robot?
screening score · 2026-10-23
Enforcement
0/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
N/A
screening score · 2026-10-23