Paper Info
Title
Concepts about the capabilities of computers and robots: a test of the scope of adults' theory of mind
Abstract
We have previously demonstrated that people apply fundamentally different concepts to mechanical agents and human agents, assuming that mechanical agents engage in more location-based, and feature-based behaviors whereas humans engage in more goal-based, and category-based behavior. We also found that attributions about anthropomorphic agents such as robots are very similar to those about computers, unless subjects are asked to attend closely to specific intentional-appearing behaviors. In the present studies, we ask whether subjects initially do not attribute intentionality to robots because they believe that temporary limits in current technology preclude real intelligent behavior. In addition, we ask whether a basic categorization as an artifact affords lessened attributions of intentionality. We find that subjects assume that robots created with future technology may become more intentional, but will not be fully equivalent to humans, and that even a fully human-controlled robot will not be as intentional as a human. These results suggest that subjects strongly distinguish intelligent agents based on intentionality, and that the basic living/mechanical distinction is powerful enough, even in adults, to make it difficult for adults to assent to the possibility that mechanical things can be fully intentional.
Year
DOI
Venue
2008
10.1145/1349822.1349831
HRI
Keywords
Field
DocType
cognition,human factors,robots,software agents,anthropomorphic agents,category-based behavior,computers,feature-based behaviors,goal-based behavior,human agents,human-controlled robot,intentional-appearing behaviors,intentionality,location-basedbehaviors,mechanical agents,real intelligent behavior,theory of mind,Concepts,HRI,Theory of Mind
Categorization,Intelligent agent,Intentionality,Cognitive science,Computer science,Theory of mind,Software agent,Human–computer interaction,Attribution,Artificial intelligence,Cognition,Robot
Conference
Citations 
PageRank 
References 
7
0.93
4
Authors
3
Name
Order
Citations
PageRank
Daniel T. Levin1325.97
Stephen S. Killingsworth2122.85
Megan M. Saylor3165.23