Ethical values and social care robots for older people
An International Qualitative Study
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8106926 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Hal Draper (0000-0002-0020-4252, corresponding author), Tom Sorell (0000-0002-7175-1413) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 49-68 |
| Publication date | 2016-12-08 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Ethics and Information Technology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1388-1957 • E-ISSN: 1572-8439 |
| Publisher | Springer Science+Business Media (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10676-016-9413-1 |
| OpenAlex | W2550865791 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 12 |
| References cited | 19 |
Values such as respect for autonomy, safety, enablement, independence, privacy and social connectedness should be reflected in the design of social robots. The same values should affect the process by which robots are introduced into the homes of older people to support independent living. These values may, however, be in tension. We explored what potential users thought about these values, and how the tensions between them could be resolved. With the help of partners in the ACCOMPANY project, 21 focus groups (123 participants) were convened in France, the Netherlands and the UK. These groups consisted of: (i) older people, (ii) informal carers and (iii) formal carers of older people. The participants were asked to discuss scenarios in which there is a conflict between older people and others over how a robot should be used, these conflicts reflecting tensions between values. Participants favoured compromise, persuasion and negotiation as a means of reaching agreement. Roles and related role-norms for the robot were thought relevant to resolving tensions, as were hypothetical agreements between users and robot-providers before the robot is introduced into the home. Participants’ understanding of each of the values—autonomy, safety, enablement, independence, privacy and social connectedness—is reported. Participants tended to agree that autonomy often has priority over the other values, with the exception in certain cases of safety. The second part of the paper discusses how the values could be incorporated into the design of social robots and operationalised in line with the views expressed by the participants
Autonomy · Compromise · Focus group · Independence (probability theory · Negotiation · Political science · Qualitative research · Robot · Social connectedness · Sociology · Computer Science · Elder Abuse and Neglect · Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health · Psychology · Social Robot Interaction and HRI · Artificial Intelligence · Social Psychology
Privacy beyond Data
Tensions and antagonistic interactions of risks and ethics of using robotics and autonomous systems in long-term care
Value Sensitive Design of Social Robots
Older People’s Ethical Framing of Autonomy in Relation to Current and Future Consumer Technologies
Technology in the Home Care of Older People
Concerns and Values in Human-Robot Interactions
Blame the Robot
Ethical aspects of the use of social robots in caring for older people – a systematic qualitative review
The privacy implications of social robots
Research on the moral status of social robots based on relational continuity
Robots and the Possibility of Humanistic Care
Governing the adoption of robotics and autonomous systems in long-term care in Singapore
The prevalence of elder abuse and neglect
Qualitative Data Analysis for Applied Policy Research
Designing Robots for Care
Robots in aged care
Carebots and Caregivers
Ethical challenges in the use of social service robots for elderly people
Granny and the robots
Can a Service Robot Which Supports Independent Living of Older People Disobey a Command? The Views of Older People, Informal Carers and Professional Caregivers on the Acceptability of Robots
Care, Monitoring, and Companionship
Robot carers, ethics, and older people
| Unique citing works | 12 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,71 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2026 (8) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 12 |