Embedded Files
Social robot or digital avatar, users interact with AI technology as if it’s real
Social robot or digital avatar, users interact with AI technology as if it’s real
Humans are interacting more than ever with artificial intelligence (AI) – from the development of the first “social robots” (a robot with a physical body programmed to interact and engage with humans) like Kismet in the 1990s to smart speakers such as Amazon’s Alexa.
But this technology is changing how humans relate with it – and with each other.
Our new research looked at how humans experience interacting with AI social robots or digital avatars – AI virtual chatbots designed to look and interact like a human on a device. These are designed to increase human interaction with them. Social robots such as ElliQ and Pepper are popular in Europe, Japan and the United States, particularly as aids for the elderly. New Zealand has been slower to adopt these technologies.
Since the pandemic, social robots and digital avatars have been used to address issues such loneliness and mental health issues. In one Scottish experiment during the pandemic, people were introduced to social robot “Pepper” over regular video chats. The researchers found the interactions lifted the mood of the participants.
Given the uncertainties around the long-term usage of these types of technologies, researchers and policymakers have a responsibility to question how these will affect humans, individually and in wider society. Social robots are increasingly used to meet medical and social needs.
Human responses to AI
Human responses to AI
Research has already established these types of technology are playing a greater role in human social relations, leading to changes in how people form connections and relationships.
Our research involved detailed interviews with 15 participants from New Zealand, Australia and Europe, coupled with broader data analysis. We found when people interact with AI social robots or digital avatars, two things happened at the same time.
Firstly, users had physical reactions and feelings towards the AI technology. These responses were largely unconscious. One user, for example, said they “unconsciously reached out, wanting to touch the [AI avatar’s] hair” on the screen. This was an instinctive response – the participant wanted to use their senses (such as touch) to engage with the digital avatar. Another participant unconsciously smiled in response to a smile from a social robot.
Secondly, users also derived meaning from their interaction with the AI technology through the use of shared language, concepts and non-verbal communication. For example, when one participant frowned, the digital avatar responded by getting “glassy eyes” as if it was upset by the participant’s expression. These shared non-verbal forms of communication allowed the participants to have meaningful interactions with the technology.
Participants also developed a level of trust in the AI social robot or digital avatar. When the conversation flowed, users would forget they were relating to a machine. The more human the AI social robots and digital avatars looked, the more alive and believable they seemed. This resulted in participants forgetting they were engaging with technology because the technology felt “real”.
As one participant said:
Even cynical people forget where they are and what they are doing. Somewhere between suspending disbelief that a system could have such a sophisticated conversation and enjoying the feeling of being in relationship with an “other”.
AI social robots and digital avatars are increasingly sharing the same spaces online and “in-person” with humans. And people are trying to physically interact with the technology as if it were human.
Another participant said:
I’ve got a bit of a spiritual connection (with the AI digital avatar) because I spent a lot of time with her.
In this way, the function of the technology has changed from being an aid in connecting humans to being the subject of affection itself.
Navigating the future of AI
Navigating the future of AI
While acknowledging the benefits of AI social technologies such as addressing loneliness and health issues, it is important to understand the broader implications of their use.
The COVID-19 pandemic showed how easily people were able to shift from in-person interactions to online communications. It is easy to imagine how this might change further, for example where humans become more comfortable developing relationships with AI social technology. There are already cases of people seeking romantic relationships with digital avatars.
The tendency of people to forget they are engaging with AI social technologies, and feeling as if they are “real”, raises concerns around unsustainable or unhealthy attachments.
As AI becomes more entrenched in daily life, international organisations are acknowledging the need for guardrails to guide the development and uses of AI. It is clear governmental and regulatory bodies need to understand and respond to the implications of AI social technologies for society. The European Commission’s recently passed AI Act offers a way forward for other governments. The AI act provides clear regulations and obligations regarding specific uses of AI.
It is important to recognise the unique characteristics of human relationships as something that should be protected. At the same time, we need to examine the probable impact of AI on how we engage and interact with others. By asking these questions we can better navigate the unknown.
Authors: Dr Brigitte Viljoen and Dr Elizabeth Day
Art by Banksy, 2014
A Discontinuity
Digital technology, specifically types of digital relating and communication such as social media, have been changing so rapidly – a digital revolution - that research has been at the beginnings in this area. Technology seems so integral in our way of relating to each other, especially for digital natives (children born into the digital revolution). Yet people seem busier, more stressed, less caring of others and somehow unavailable. Something seems to have changed in the way people (especially younger generations) relate and connect with others, compared with previous generations.
The question is; what is the impact of digital communicating and the unfolding of human development and attachment – especially for children and teenagers? How are people (especially the younger generations) changing the way they communicate to a larger degree and how this has this impacted us neurologically, psychologically and socially, and what this might mean for our future?
Online relating may facilitate the maintenance and development of social networks and create online communities. In this process, what seems to be occurring, is that the use of social media has resulted in different language to offline language use, with different purposes and different meanings. However, in this process, it seemed something of the relating, via online communication such as social media, was lost in translation; i.e. depth of meaning seemed to be lacking in online communication and lack of non-verbal communication evident in face-to-face interactions. Along with the development of this online language, there seemed to be the development of an online culture. This online culture seems to be gaining momentum where as more people, especially teenagers and children, who spend incrementally more time online, their individual, family and community cultures in the real world seem to be forsaken for the online culture, or at least disrupt real world cultural norms.
I suggest that whether children and teenagers are securely or insecurely attached, the fact they are invariably all spending increasingly more amounts of time interacting with others online, rather than face-to-face with attachment figures, seems to be disrupting their attachment experiences as humans. Digital native’s online behaviour and drive for peer connection and attachment seems to be pervasive and seems to be impacting on offline healthy attachment relationships. The digital revolution has arrived and continues to change and develop at such a pace, that researchers are, seemingly, continuously on the back-foot, in terms of exploring and endeavouring to understand the impact of these technologies on humans and human relating. Additionally, it appears that the increased use of the Internet has effected family life and relationships, where there seems to be declines in family member communication, smaller social circles and the corresponding increase in depression and loneliness. Resulting in the digital natives’ important developmental stage being significantly impacted as a result of the effects of the digital communication technology.
It would seem that mass social media communication has become the norm, especially among digital natives, with the result that intimacy with others is diminished or lost entirely. I wonder about the increased insecurity, and anxiety around being vulnerable and intimate with others, that many experience as a result of insecure attachment experiences, perpetuated by their online relating. It seems a downward spiral of seeking more connections online, as a form of protection from their insecurities, which seems to result in rather superficial attachments that rather preoccupy than result in meaningful, deep bonds – which humans innately need. Additionally, as adolescents who are experimenting and developing their identities, are highly influence social media which is more likely to reshape their identity. I wonder what society will be like were more and more people display insecure attachments, are preoccupied online as opposed to relating with the people around them offline, and more disconnected from themselves?
It has been reiterated that humans have a preeminent need for attachment and connection to other humans. This seems to be the driver in the exponential use of online relating through technologies such as social media which, in turn, seems to be impacting on our ways of relating, being and thinking. It raises the questions; such as, what will become of ‘real world’ society if we ‘forget’ our humanness – our empathy for others, our multi-generational heritages and cultures that make us unique and who we are, our physical contact with our attachment figures and subtle non-verbal communications?
As a human species, we have an innate need for attachment to others, as a means of survival, both physiologically and psychologically. Essentially the human species drive is deeply relational in nature. The disruption of this vital aspect of our humanness, is bound to have serious implications on society and on the public health system. The cyberspace world is potentially a silent threat that has taken hold – especially for digital natives. It is important to bear in mind that throughout the generations, where new tools and technology are developed, there has been radical changes to the nature of the human society. However, digital technology, specifically the availability of online relating through the portable devices of Smartphones, has rapidly revolutionised human connection and relating. As such this technology, seems to have happened so fast that we are not sure what the effects will be. I believe the answer lies in parental and community education, and working with the children and teenagers presenting with mental health issues, and their families.
Digital technology allows a broad scope of connections and impacts and, therefore, requires a broad treatment response. For example, if parents have a better understanding of their own parenting styles, as well as, the 'how' and 'why' their children use digital technology the way they do, they are more likely to have more healthy outcomes for their children both neurologically, psychologically and socially, and in their direct relationships with their children. This will then have a knock-on effect within their communities as well.
Author: Dr Brigitte Viljoen
Counselling and psychotherapy of and in the South Pacific
Counselling and psychotherapy of and in the South Pacific
Abstract
This article presents and comments on the process and findings of scoping the field of counselling and psychotherapy in the South Pacific. Influenced by critical theory and, specifically, ‘Southern theory’, the authors were and are concerned to acknowledge indigenous healing traditions that predated the arrival of Western – and, in effect, Northern – counselling and psychotherapy theory and practice. This scoping study is intended to lay the groundwork for further work that identifies and reflects critically on therapeutic practice and theory in this region.
Authors: Dr Keith Tudor and Dr Brigitte Viljoen
DOI: 10.1080/21507686.2017.1415944
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse