Source assessmentSupporting
Editorial: Should Robots Have Standing? The Moral and Legal Status of Social Robots
Moral and legal status of robotsAcademic
Assessment outcome
total 3/6 (actionability 0 + authority 1 + currency 2)
Total3/6
Actionability0/2
Authority1/2
Currency2/2
Authorship & scope
Attribution (G4 evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuer authority (evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuers, who it governs, legal force and content are on the full record.
Eligibility gates
G1 · Retrievablepass
Passed in screening.
G2 · AI nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G3 · Governance nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G4 · Attributablepass
Passed in screening.
G5 · In forcepass
Passed in screening.
Scored criteria
Actionability
0/2No rationale recorded.
Authority
1/2No rationale recorded.
Citation: Gunkel DJ, Gerdes A and Coeckelbergh M (2022) Editorial: Should Robots Have Standing? The Moral and Legal Status of Social Robots. Front. Robot. AI 9:946529. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2022.946529
Currency
2/2No rationale recorded.
Classification
Coverage topicMoral and legal status of robots
PerspectiveAcademic
Lifecycle stageN/A cross-cutting
Layerboth
GranularityNot recorded