↓ Skip to main content

Mind Perception of Robots Varies With Their Economic Versus Social Function

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mind Perception of Robots Varies With Their Economic Versus Social Function
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01230
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xijing Wang, Eva G. Krumhuber

Abstract

While robots were traditionally built to achieve economic efficiency and financial profits, their roles are likely to change in the future with the aim to provide social support and companionship. In this research, we examined whether the robot's proposed function (social vs. economic) impacts judgments of mind and moral treatment. Studies 1a and 1b demonstrated that robots with social function were perceived to possess greater ability for emotional experience, but not cognition, compared to those with economic function and whose function was not mentioned explicitly. Study 2 replicated this finding and further showed that low economic value reduced ascriptions of cognitive capacity, whereas high social value resulted in increased emotion perception. In Study 3, robots with high social value were more likely to be afforded protection from harm, and such effect was related to levels of ascribed emotional experience. Together, the findings demonstrate a dissociation between function type (social vs. economic) and ascribed mind (emotion vs. cognition). In addition, the two types of functions exert asymmetric influences on the moral treatment of robots. Theoretical and practical implications for the field of social psychology and human-computer interaction are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 22 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 27%
Business, Management and Accounting 9 11%
Social Sciences 7 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 5%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 28 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2018.
All research outputs
#3,683,506
of 25,827,956 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,891
of 34,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,036
of 341,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#203
of 720 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,827,956 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,812 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,696 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 720 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.