Warrior Bot, Relational Bot, Blameworthy Bot

How a Student Design Team Anthropomorphize Their Combat Robot Creations

Bibliographic Data

ID22190860
AuthorsDaniel B Shank (0000-0002-3746-2407, Missouri University of Science and Technology), Frederick F Sunkpal (0009-0006-8835-5229, Missouri University of Science and Technology), Nova-Lee Young (0009-0009-2288-2319, University of Missouri–St. Louis), Karli Hoerstkamp (0009-0001-1469-6278, Missouri University of Science and Technology), David Wright (0000-0001-8130-656X, Missouri University of Science and Technology), Merilee A Krueger (0009-0009-2969-971X, Missouri University of Science and Technology), Carleigh Davis (0000-0003-4667-4273, Missouri University of Science and Technology)
Year2026
Volume15
Issue2
Pages1-33
Publication date2026-03-31
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2573-9522 • E-ISSN: 2573-9522
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery (ACM) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1145/3785150
OpenAlexW4417436116
LanguageEN
References cited62

How do robot designers anthropomorphize their own creations? Because robot designers have the ability to alter the robot, identify as its creator, and understand their robot’s internal makeup, their process of anthropomorphism and its outcomes may be different from that of the typical robot user. We investigate this research question in the domain of combat robots, where anthropomorphism is critical to decision-making, communication, and trust in high-stakes, high-emotion combat situations faced by robot-soldier teams. We conducted an in-depth case study of a university’s student-led Combat Robotics Design Team over the design, construction, testing, and competition phases for their competitive combat robot. Based on inductive computational and human coding of extensive field notes, supplemented with interviews and surveys, we found that these robot designers anthropomorphize for three purposes. First, they anthropomorphize the bot to manage impressions of it within their team and to outsiders like competitors, spectators, and sponsors, specifically presenting it as a warrior. Second, they anthropomorphize it like a child, a pet, or simply treat it as a non-anthropomorphic mechanical set of parts as a way to calibrate their relationship and attach with or detach from their own creation. Third, they anthropomorphize the bots to assign blame either blaming it, its parts, or others based on their expectations of whether it is performing based on how they designed it. We conclude with implications for anthropomorphism by robot designers and application to military robot design

Blame · Human–robot interaction · Robot · Robotics · AI in Service Interactions · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Social Robot Interaction and HRI