Skip to main content

Readable as Intimate: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Empirical Interrogation of Software Implementations of Intimacy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
AI Love You

Abstract

We provide a conceptual framework to assess the technical readiness of sex robots for intimate relationships with their human users. We build on an existing framework of simulation of sociality by social robots, and extend it through the lens of the sense–think–act paradigm as it is used in robotics research. Although simulation of sociality by a sex robot involves presenting a coherent personality, considering technical capability requires viewing it as an interactive multi-device, multicomponent system. Drawing from two illustrative consumer technology examples (Gatebox and Realbotix products), we identify access and actuation as key additional elements applicable to the interpretation of sex robots through the existing framework of simulation of sociality. What information is accessed and how it is then used to inform the system’s actions depends on the production and maintenance constraints of the system, and may be incidentally or intentionally obscure to a human observer. We relate this technical consideration to a psychological concept of intimacy as mutual self-disclosure and vulnerability over time. Our extension of existing work on simulation of social performance by a robot highlights how the technical and organizational constraints prevent mutual disclosure and vulnerability. The user discloses themselves to the hardware/software system—and through the system, to its creators, operators, and data-processing third parties—but neither the system nor the implicated organizations disclose their inner workings to the user. Interrogating a particular system’s capacity to simulate intimacy requires not only observing the immediate and apparent action but also considering the issues of access and actuation as they inform the possibility of mutual disclosure and vulnerability over time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agre, P. (1997). Toward a critical technical practice: Lessons learned in trying to reform AI. In Social science, technical systems and cooperative work: Beyond the great divide. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aron, A., Melinat, E., Aron, E. N., Vallone, R. D., & Bator, R. J. (1997). The experimental generation of interpersonal closeness: A procedure and some preliminary findings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(4), 363–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breazeal, C. (2003). Toward sociable robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 167–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canepari, Z., Cooper, D., Cott, E. (2017). The uncanny lover [Video File]. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/video/technology/100000003731634/the-uncanny-lover.html

  • Cetina, K. K., Schatzki, T. R., & Von Savigny, E. (Eds.). (2005). The practice turn in contemporary theory. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engadget. (2018). Sex Robot hands-on at CES 2018. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO9KrOhJ5NM

  • Fitzpatrick, K. K., Darcy, A., & Vierhile, M. (2017). Delivering cognitive behavior therapy to young adults with symptoms of depression and anxiety using a fully automated conversational agent (Woebot): A randomized controlled trial. JMIR Mental Health, 4(2), e19. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.7785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 143–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatebox Lab. (2016, December 13). Gatebox - Virtual Home Robot [PV]_english. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkcKaNqfykg

  • Gregg, M. (2011). Work’s intimacy. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, A. S., & Van der Tuin, I. (2013). The ontological force of technicity: Reading Cassirer and Simondon diffractively. Philosophy and Technology, 26(2), 187–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, P. H., Jr., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Gill, B. T., Shen, S., Gary, H. E., & Ruckert, J. H. (2015, March). Will people keep the secret of a humanoid robot?: Psychological intimacy in hri. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 173–180). ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, P. H., Jr. (2011). Technological nature: Adaptation and the future of human life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, P. H., Jr., Gary, H. E., & Shen, S. (2013). Children’s social relationship with current and near-future robots. Child Development Perspectives, 7, 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, P. H., Jr., Ishiguro, H., Friedman, B., Kanda, T., Freier, N. G., Severson, R. L., & Miller, J. (2007). What is a human? Toward psychological benchmarks in the field of human-robot interaction. Interaction Studies: Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems, 8(3), 363–390. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.8.3.04kah

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurenceau, J. P., Barrett, L. F., & Pietromonaco, P. R. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LINE_DEV. (2017, Oct 12). Gatebox: How we got here and where we’re going -English version- [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhn20nIFBQ0

  • Mankins, J. C. (1995). Technology readiness levels [White paper]. Retrieved July 31, 2018, from University of Colorado: https://www.colorado.edu/ASEN/asen3036/TECHNOLOGYREADINESSLEVELS.pdf

  • Massumi, B. (1987). Realer than real: The simulacrum according to Deleuze and Guattari. Copyright, 1, 90–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevejans, N. (2016). European civil law rules in robotics. European Union. Retrieved July 31, 2018, from European Parliament: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/571379/IPOL_STU(2016)571379_EN.pdf

  • Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reis, H. T., & Shaver, P. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. Handbook of Personal Relationships, 24(3), 367–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheutz, M., & Arnold, T. (2016, March). Are we ready for sex robots? In The Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (pp. 351–358). IEEE Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheutz, M., & Arnold, T. (2017). Intimacy, bonding, and sex robots: Examining empirical results and exploring ethical ramifications. Unpublished manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibt, J. (2017). Towards an ontology of simulated social interaction: Varieties of the “As If” for robots and humans. In R. Hakli & J. Seibt (Eds.), Sociality and normativity for robots: Philosophical inquiries into human-robot interactions (pp. 11–39). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sengers, P. (1998). Anti-boxology: agent design in cultural context (No. CMU-CS-98-151). CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIV PITTSBURGH PA DEPT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, M. (2003, June). The sense-think-act paradigm revisited. In 1st International Workshop on Robotic Sensing, 2003. ROSE’03 (p. 5). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (2002). Located accountabilities in technology production. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullins, J. P. (2012). Robots, love, and sex: The ethics of building a love machine. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 3(4), 398–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S. (2005). The second self: Computers and the human spirit. Mit Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weizenbaum, J. (1966). ELIZA—A computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the ACM, 9(1), 36–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weizenbaum, J. (1976). Computer power and human reason: From judgment to calculation. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winner, L. (2009). Do artifacts have politics? In Readings in the philosophy of technology (pp. 251–263). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeoman, I., & Mars, M. (2012). Robots, men and sex tourism. Futures, 44(4), 365–371.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kit Kuksenok .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kuksenok, K., Santagati, S. (2019). Readable as Intimate: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Empirical Interrogation of Software Implementations of Intimacy. In: Zhou, Y., Fischer, M.H. (eds) AI Love You. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19734-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics