Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T09:14:31.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On depicting social agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2023

Herbert H. Clark Open the ORCID record for Herbert H. Clark [Opens in a new window]  and
Kerstin Fischer Open the ORCID record for Kerstin Fischer [Opens in a new window]
Herbert H. Clark
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2130, USA clark@stanford.edu; web.stanford.edu/~clark/
Kerstin Fischer
Affiliation:
Department of Design and Communication, University of Southern Denmark, DK-6400 Sonderborg, Denmark kerstin@sdu.dk; www.sdu.dk/ansat/kerstin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We take up issues raised in the commentaries about our proposal that social robots are depictions of social agents. Among these issues are the realism of social agents, experiencing robots, communicating with robots, anthropomorphism, and attributing traits to robots. We end with comments about the future of social robots.

Type
Authors' Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e51
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Airenti, G. (2018). The development of anthropomorphism in interaction: Intersubjectivity, imagination, and theory of mind. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(2136), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atkin, A. (2010). Peirce's theory of signs. In Zalta, E. N. & Nodelman, U. (Eds.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University.Google Scholar
Bender, E. M., & Koller, A. (2020). Climbing towards NLU: On Meaning, Form, and Understanding in the Age of Data. Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chatman, S. B. (1980). Story and discourse: Narrative structure in fiction and film. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V., & Kelly, B. F. (2021). Constructing a system of communication with gestures and words. In Morgenstern, A. & Goldin-Meadow, S. (Eds.), Gesture in language: Development across the lifespan (pp. 137–156). Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. (2005). Coordinating with each other in a material world. Discourse Studies, 7(4–5), 507–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. (2016). Depicting as a method of communication. Psychological Review, 123(3), 324–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, H. H. (2019). Depicting in communication. In Hagoort, P. (Ed.), Human language: From genes and brains to behavior (pp. 235–247). MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. (2021). Anchoring utterances. Topics in Cognitive Science, 13(2), 329–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M. & Teasley, S. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Gerrig, R. J. (1990). Quotations as demonstrations. Language, 66(4), 764–805.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Henetz, T. (2014). Working together. In Holtgraves, T. M. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 85–97). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F. (1989). Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13(2), 259–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Van Der Wege, M. A. (2015). Imagination in narratives. In Tannen, D., Hamilton, H. E. & Schiffrin, D. (Eds.), Handbook of discourse analysis (2nd ed., pp. 406–421). John Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennett, D. C. (1987). The intentional stance. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. (1988). Précis of the intentional stance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11(3), 495–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, S., & Kintsch, W. (2007). Evaluating theories. In Halpern, D. F. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Critical thinking in psychology (pp. 143–159). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, M. (2013). Ideophones and gesture in everyday speech. Gesture, 13(2), 143–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, M., Roberts, S. G., Baranova, J., Blythe, J., Drew, P., Floyd, S., … Enfield, N. J. (2015). Universal principles in the repair of communication problems. PLoS ONE, 10(9), e0136100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection through inferential reproduction: Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19(2), 114–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, K. (2016). Designing speech for a recipient: The roles of partner modeling, alignment and feedback in so-called “simplified registers”. John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, K. (2021). Tracking anthropomorphizing behavior in human–robot interaction. ACM Transactions in Human–Robot Interaction, 11(1), Article 4, 1–28. doi: 10.1145/3442677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foulkes, N. (2017). Automata. Éditions Xavier Barral.Google Scholar
Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H. Jr, & Hagman, J. (2003). Hardware Companions? What Online AIBO Discussion Forums Reveal about the Human–Robotic Relationship. Paper presented at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Ft. Lauderdale, FL.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, J. (1985). The art of fiction: Notes on craft for young writers. Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Gendler, T. S. (2008). Alief and belief. The Journal of Philosophy, 105(10), 634–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gendler, T. S., & Kovakovich, K. (2006). Genuine rational fictional emotions. In Kieran, M. (Ed.), Contemporary debates in aesthetics and the philosophy of art (pp. 241–253). Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception. Science (New York, N.Y.), 315(5812), 619. doi: 10.1126/science.1134475CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grice, H. P. (1957). Meaning. The Philosophical Review, 66, 377–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1969). Utterer's meaning and intention. The Philosophical Review, 78(2), 147–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, J. J. (2008). Emotion regulation. In Lewis, M., Haviland-Jones, J. M., & Barrett, L. F. (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 497–513). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Gross, J. J., Fredrickson, B. L., & Levenson, R. W. (1994). The psychophysiology of crying. Psychophysiology, 31, 460–468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gross, J. J., & Levenson, R. W. (1995). Emotion elicitation using films. Cognition and Emotion, 9(1), 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, S., Lenchner, J., Connell, J., Dholakia, M., & Muta, H. (2017). Conversational bootstrapping and other tricks of a concierge robot. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction, Vienna, Austria.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, F. (2012). Effects of a Robot's Aesthetic Design on the Attribution of Social Capabilities. Paper presented at the 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 1st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Hortensius, R., & Cross, E. S. (2018). From automata to animate beings: The scope and limits of attributing socialness to artificial agents. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1426(1), 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2012). Two systems in the mind. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 65(2), 55–59.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lencioni, T., Carpinella, I., Rabuffetti, M., Marzegan, A., & Ferrarin, M. (2019). Human kinematic, kinetic and EMG data during different walking and stair ascending and descending tasks. Scientific Data, 6(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marge, M., Espy-Wilson, C., Ward, N. G., Alwan, A., Artzi, Y., Bansal, M., … Dey, D. (2022). Spoken language interaction with robots: Recommendations for future research. Computer Speech & Language, 71, 101255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1932). The icon, index, and symbol. In Hartshorne, C. & Weiss, P. (Eds.), Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 2, pp. 156–173). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1974). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 3). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Perry, J. (1979). The problem of the essential indexical. Noûs, 13(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, J. (1993). The problem of the essential indexical, and other essays. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, E., Ullman, D., de Graaf, M. M., & Malle, B. F. (2017). What does a robot look like?: A multi-site examination of user expectations about robot appearance. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 61(1), 1215–1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Recanati, F. (2012). Mental files. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Recanati, F. (2013). Mental files: Replies to my critics. Disputatio, 5(36), 205–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeves, B., Hancock, J., & Liu, S. X. (2020). Social robots are like real people: First impressions, attributes, and stereotyping of social robots. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 1(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G., Brennan, S., & Carey, S. (1987). Identification and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 19(4), 473–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruijten, P. A. M. (2015). Responses to human-like artificial agents. Uitgeverij BOXPress.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, R. C. (1978). Assertion. In Cole, P. (Ed.), Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics (pp. 315–332). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Thellman, S., de Graaf, M., & Ziemke, T. (2022). Mental state attribution to robots: A systematic review of conceptions, methods, and findings. ACM Transactions on Human–Robot Interaction (THRI), 11(4), 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, F., & Johnston, O. (1995). The illusion of life: Disney animation. Hyperion.Google Scholar
Truitt, E. R. (2015). Medieval robots: Mechanism, magic, nature, and art. University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turkle, S., Breazeal, C., Dasté, O., & Scassellati, B. (2006). Encounters with Kismet and Cog: Children respond to relational artifacts. In Messaris, P. & Humphreys, L. (Eds.), Digital media: Transformations in human communication (pp. 313–330). Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Walton, K. L. (1978). Fearing fictions. The Journal of Philosophy, 75(1), 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisman, K., Dweck, C. S., & Markman, E. M. (2017). Rethinking people's conceptions of mental life. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(43), 11374–11379. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1704347114CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolf, W. (2009). Illusion (aesthetic). In Hühn, P., Pier, J., Schmid, W., & Schönert, J. (Eds.), Handbook of narratology (Vol. 1, pp. 270–287). De Gruyter.Google Scholar