Slashdot Mirror


Emotional Attachment To Robots Could Affect Battlefield Outcome

vinces99 writes "It's becoming more common to have robots sub for humans to do dirty or sometimes dangerous work. But researchers are finding that, in some cases, people have started to treat robots like pets, friends or even as an extension of themselves. That raises a question: If a soldier attaches human or animal-like characteristics to a field robot, can it affect how they use the robot? What if they 'care' too much about the robot to send it into a dangerous situation? Julie Carpenter, who just received a doctorate in education from the University of Washington, wanted to find out. She interviewed Explosive Ordnance Disposal military personnel – highly trained soldiers who use robots to disarm explosives – about how they feel about the robots they work with every day. What she found is that troops' relationships with robots continue to evolve as the technology changes. Soldiers told her that attachment to their robots didn't affect their performance, yet acknowledged they felt a range of emotions such as frustration, anger and even sadness when their field robot was destroyed. That makes Carpenter wonder whether outcomes on the battlefield could potentially be compromised by human-robot attachment, or the feeling of self-extension into the robot described by some operators."

3 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. No. by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just... no.

    I get that they might be sad when a robot they were using somehow gets lost or destroyed, but I really can't see that influencing how likely they are to use that robot for dangerous situations unless the soldier had somehow personally invested time and energy into making the robot do or act the way that it does, and in particular such that it would require some substantial personal investment (monetary, timewise, workwise, or simply having to wait a while) to replace it.

    1. Re:No. by globaljustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      yep just 'no' is kind...

      i'd call the research total bullshit...

      unless the soldier had somehow personally invested time and energy into making the robot do or act the way that it does

      right...this is *at the most*

      it's the same as a favorite gun or hat or w/e...I know in high school if you'd have asked me if I had an emotional attachment to my lucky black socks, I'd have said yes, and probably answered a damn Likert Scale questionaire in a way similar to this...

      fuck I hate what passes for PhD work these days...

      this study **might** have been worthwhile if she'd done some actual science by comparing her results with the bomb bot to things like favorite *boots* and *rifle* and then to drone pilots and their craft...that'd be the start of a PhD worthy researxch project

      bah!

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  2. Re:The solution is simple: by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Before we had robots to do EOD, men had to do it.

    No matter how attached someone might be to his robot, he's going to be more attached to his men.

    Until you find an EOD guy who says "Wish we'd never invented these robots, things were much better when *I* was the one being blown into next week rather than my little metal buddy here..." you don't have to worry about human attitudes to robots affecting their judgement in war.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"