Exploding the android: encounters with social robotics in a science centre

References

• Ahmed, S. 2014. Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alač, M. 2009. “Moving Android: On Social Robots and Body-in-Interaction.” Social Studies of Science 39 (4): 491–528. doi:10.1177/0306312709103476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alač, M. 2015. “Social Robots: Things or Agents?” AI and Society 31 (1): 519–535. doi:10.1007/s00146-015-0631-6.
   Google Scholar
• Antonello, P. 2009. “Beyond Futurism: Bruno Munari’s Useless Machines.” In Futurism and the Technological Imagination, edited by G. Berghaus, 315–336. Brill Rodopi: Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Bacchini, F., and L. Lorusso. 2019. “Race, Again. How Face Recognition Technology Reinforces Racial Discrimination.” Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 17 (3): 321–335. doi:10.1108/JICES-05-2018-0050.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnet, B. 2006. “Engelbart’s Theory of Technical Evolution.” Continuum 20 (4): 509–521. doi:10.1080/10304310600988302.
   Google Scholar
• Bartneck, C., C. Lü, A. Wagner, and S. Welsh. 2020. An Introduction to Ethics in Robotics and AI. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, L. 2008. “Engaging the Public in Technology Policy: A New Role for Science Museums.” Science Communication 29 (3): 386–398. doi:10.1177/1075547007311971.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beretta, M., E. Canadelli, and L. Ronzon. 2019. Behind the Exhibit: Displaying Science and Technology at World’s Fairs and Museums in the Twentieth Century. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press. doi:10.5479/si.9781944466237.
   Google Scholar
• Bilgin, G., E. Kerruish, R. Kennett, R. DeSalle, A. Beck, A. Jordon, D. Newton-Walters, and M. Cracknell. 2022. “Born or Built? Exploring Visitor Understandings of Robotics.” Journal of Science Communication 21 (1): 1–19. doi:10.22323/2.21010802.
   Google Scholar
• Boer, L., and H. Bewley. 2018. “Reconfiguring the Appearance and Expression of Social Robots by Acknowledging Their Otherness.” In Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference, edited by T. Cerratto-Pargman, I. Koskinen, Y. Lim, K. Chow, and W. Odom, 667–677. Hong Kong: ACM. doi:10.1145/3196709.3196743.
   Google Scholar
• Breazeal, C. L. 2002. Designing Sociable Robots. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cardini, P. 2015. “Matafunctional/MetaFictional Objects.” Articles 7. https://digitalcommons.risd.edu/critical_futures_symposium_articles/7Castañeda,C.
   Google Scholar
• Castañeda, C., and L. Suchman. 2014. “Robot Visions.” Social Studies in Science 44 (3): 315–341. doi:10.1177/0306312713511868.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesher, C. 2019. “Toy Robots on YouTube: Consumption and Peer Production at the Robotic Moment.” Convergence 25 (1): 148–160. doi:10.1177/1354856517706492.
   Google Scholar
• Chesher, C., and F. Andreallo. 2021. “Robotic Faciality: The Philosophy, Science and Art of Robot Faces.” International Journal Social Robotics 13 (1): 83–96. doi:10.1007/s12369-020-00623-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coeckelbergh, M. 2011. “Humans, Animals, and Robots: A Phenomenological Approach to Human-Robot Relations.” International Journal of Social Robotics 3 (2): 197–204. doi:10.1007/s12369-010-0075-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coeckelbergh, M. 2018. “The Art, Poetics, and Grammar of Technological Innovation as Practice, Process, and Performance.” AI and Society 33 (4): 501–510. doi:10.1007/s00146-017-0714-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coeckelbergh, M. 2022. “Three Responses to Anthropomorphism in Social Robotics: Towards a Critical, Relational, and Hermeneutic Approach.” International Journal of Social Robotics 14 (10): 2049–2061. doi:10.1007/s12369-021-00770-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damasio, A. R. 2000. The Feeling of What Happens: Body, Emotion and the Making of Consciousness. London: Vintage.
   Google Scholar
• Dautenhahn, K. 1997. “I Could be you: The Phenomenological Dimension of Social Understanding.” Cybernetics and Systems 28: 417–453. doi:10.1080/019697297126074.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, S. R., M. Halpern, M. Horst, D. S. Kirby, and B. Lewenstein. 2019. “Science Stories as Culture: Experience, Identity, Narrative and Emotion in Public Communication of Science.” Journal of Science Communication 18 (5): A01. doi:10.22323/2.18050201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derrida, J. 1979. Spurs. Nietzsche’s Styles/Éperons. Les Styles de Nietzsche. Trans B Harlow. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dimitrievska, V., and N. Ackovska. 2020. “Behavior Models of Emotion-Featured Robots: A Survey.” Journal of Intelligent Robot Systems 100 (3–4): 1031–1053. doi:10.1007/s10846-020-01219-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dror, O. E. 2001. “Counting the Affects: Discoursing in Numbers.” Social Research 68 (2): 357–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson, E. S. 1977. “The Mind’s Eye: Nonverbal Thought in Technology.” Science (American Assoc for the Adv of Sci) 197 (4306): 827–836. doi:10.1126/science.197.4306.827.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, A. J. 2007. “The Extraordinary Growth of the Science-Technology Museum.” Curator 50 (1): 63–75. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2007.tb00250.x.
   Google Scholar
• Gemeinboeck, P. 2021. “The Aesthetics of Encounter: A Relational-Performative Design Approach to Human-Robot Interaction.” Frontiers in Robotics and AI 7: 217: 577900 doi:10.3389/frobt.2020.577900.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gemeinboeck, P., and R. Saunders. 2022. “Moving Beyond the Mirror: Relational and Performative Meaning Making in Human–Robot Communication.” AI & Society 37 (2): 549–563. doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01212-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, H. A., and S. Rossbach. 2011. The Artificial Human. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Gore, M., and S. M. Stocklmayer. 2011. “Interactive Science Centres in Australia.” In Understanding Museums: Australian Museums and Museology, edited by D. Griffin, and L. Paroissien, 1–3. Canberra: National Museum of Australia. https://nma.gov.au/research/understanding-museums/MGore_SStocklmayer_2011.html.
   Google Scholar
• Gunkel, D. J. 2007. “Thinking Otherwise: Ethics, Technology and Other Subjects.” Ethics and Information Technology 9 (3): 165–177. doi:10.1007/s10676-007-9137-3.
   Google Scholar
• Gunkel, D. J. 2012. The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gunkel, D. J. 2018. “The Other Question: Can and Should Robots Have Rights?” Ethics and Information Technology 20 (2): 87–99. doi:10.1007/s10676-017-9442-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, A. K., and J. Nilsson. 2019. Exploring User Interactions with the Articulated Head in Different Settings. Masters Thesis, University of Canberra and University of Aalborg.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. J. 1991. “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.” In Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hasse, C. 2013. “Artefacts That Talk: Mediating Technologies as Multistable Signs and Tools.” Subjectivity 6 (1): 79–100. doi:10.1057/sub.2012.29.
   Google Scholar
• Hasse, C. 2019. “The Vitruvian Robot.” AI and Society 34 (1): 91–93. doi:10.1007/s00146-017-0701-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heider, F., and G. Simmel. 1944. “An Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior.” The American Journal of Psychology 57 (2): 243–259. doi:10.2307/1416950.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herath, D., and C. Kroos. 2016. “Engineering the Arts.” In Robots and Art, edited by D. Herath, and C. Kroos, 3–17. Singapore: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, G., and W. Ju. 2014. “Designing Robots with Movement in Mind.” Journal of Human-Robot Interaction 3 (1): 91–122. doi:10.5898/JHRI.3.1.Hoffman.
   Google Scholar
• IEEE Spectrum. 2012. “Robot Mirrors Our Emotions.” YouTube, 15 November. Accessed 30 July. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = pgwOWLCSWxs.
   Google Scholar
• IEEE Spectrum. 2019. “Interview with Geminoid HI-1.” YouTube, 20 June. Accessed 30 July. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = dl6sB19xy3o 19.
   Google Scholar
• Ihde, D. 1990. Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jagger, A. M. 1989. “Love and Knowledge.” Inquiry 32: 151–176. doi:10.1080/00201748908602185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroos, C., D. C. Herath, and L. Stelarc. 2012. “Evoking Agency: Attention Model and Behavior Control in a Robotic Art Installation.” Leonardo 45 (5): 401–412. doi:10.1162/LEON_a_00435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Küster, D., A. Swiderska, and D. Gunkel. 2020. “I Saw It on YouTube! How Online Videos Shape Perceptions of Mind, Morality, and Fears About Robots.” New Media and Society, 23 (11): 3312–3331. doi:10.1177/1461444820954199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ladenheim, K., and A. LaViers. 2021. “Babyface: Performance and Installation art Exploring the Feminine Ideal in Gendered Machines.” Frontiers in Robotics and AI 8: 576664. doi:10.3389/frobt.2021.576664.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1988. The Pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, C. 2000. Copying Machines: Taking Notes for the Automaton. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Massumi, B. 2002. Parables for the Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Menadue, C. B., and K. D. Cheer. 2017. “Human Culture and Science Fiction: A Review of the Literature 1980-2016.” SAGE Open 7 (3): 1–15. doi:10.1177/2158244017723690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mori, M. 1970. “The Uncanny Valley.” Energy 7 (4): 33–35.
   Google Scholar
• Musa Giuliano, R. 2020. “Echoes of Myth and Magic in the Language of Artificial Intelligence.” AI and Society 35: 1009–1024. doi:10.1007/s00146-020-00966-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parviainen, J., and M. Coeckelbergh. 2020. “The Political Choreography of the Sophia Robot: Beyond Robot Rights and Citizenship to Political Performances for the Social Robotics Market.” AI and Society 36 (3): 715–724. doi:10.1007/s00146-020-01104-w.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Payr, S. 2019. “Search of a Narrative for Human-Robot Relationships.” Cybernetics and Systems 50 (3): 281–299. doi:10.1080/01969722.2018.1550913.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penny, Simon. 2013. “Art and Robotics: Sixty Years of Situated Machines.” AI & Society 28 (2): 147–156. doi:10.1007/s00146-012-0404-4.
   Google Scholar
• Questacon. 2021. Questacon Customer Service, Charter Commonwealth of Australia. Accessed August 8, 2021. www.questacon.edu.au/business/customer-service-charter.
   Google Scholar
• Riskin, J. 2003. “The Defecating Duck, or, the Ambiguous Origins of Artificial Life.” Critical Inquiry 29 (4): 599–633. doi:10.1086/377722.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romele, A. 2021. “Technological Capital: Bourdieu, Postphenomenology, and the Philosophy of Technology Beyond the Empirical Turn.” Philosophy and Technology 34: 483–505. https://ezproxy.scu.edu.au, doi:10.1007/s13347-020-00398-4.
   Google Scholar
• Rosental, C. 2013. “Toward a Sociology of Public Demonstrations.” Sociological Theory 31 (4): 343–365. doi:10.1177/0735275113513454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rydell, R. W. 2006. “World Fairs and Museums.” In A Companion to Museum Studies, edited by G. E. Hein, and S. Macdonald, 135–151. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Sandry, E. 2015. “‘Re-Evaluating the Form and Communication of Social’ Robots.” International Journal of Social Robotics 7 (3): 335–346. doi:10.1007/s12369-014-0278-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandry, E. 2016. “The Potential of Otherness in Robotic art.” In Robots and Art, edited by C. Kroos, and D. Herath, 177–189. Singapore: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sarrica, M., S. Brondi, and L. Fortunati. 2020. “How Many Facets Does a ‘Social Robot’ Have? A Review of Scientific and Popular Definitions Online.” Information Technology and People 33 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1108/ITP-04-2018-0203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheutz, M. 2011. “The Inherent Dangers of Unidirectional Emotional Bonds Between Humans and Social Robots.” In Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics, edited by P. Lin, K. Abney, and G. A. Bekey, 205–215. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Searle, J. R. 1980. “Minds, Brains, and Programs.” Behavioural and Brain Science 3 (3): 417–457. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00005756.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seibt, J., and R. Rodogno. 2019. “Understanding Emotions and Their Significance Through Social Robots, and Vice Versa.” Techné 23 (3): 257–269. doi:10.5840/techne2019233104.
   Google Scholar
• Serholt, S., S. Ljungblad, and N. Ní Bhroin. 2021. “Introduction: Special Issue—Critical Robotics Research.” AI and Society 37 (2): 417–423. doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01224-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharkey, A., and N. Sharkey. 2012. “Granny and the Robots: Ethical Issues in Robot Care for the Elderly.” Ethics in Infornation Technology 14 (1): 27–40. doi:10.1007/s10676-010-9234-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, W. 2009. “Theatre of use: A Frame Analysis of Information Technology Demonstrations.” Social Studies of Science 39 (3): 449–480. doi:10.1177/0306312708101978.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens, E., and T. Heffernan. 2016. “We Have Always Been Robots: The History of Robots and art.” In Robots and Art, edited by C. Kroos, and D. Herath, 29–45. Singapore: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Stiegler, B. 1998. Technics and Time: The Fault of Epimetheus (Vol. 1). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stiegler, B. 2016. Automatic Society: The Future of Work. Trans. by D. Ross. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. 2011. “Subject Objects.” Feminist Theory 12 (2): 119–145. doi:10.1177/1464700111404205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Šabanović, S. 2010. “Robots in Society, Society in Robots: Mutual Shaping of Society and Technology as a Framework for Social Robot Design.” International Journal of Social Robotics 2 (4): 439–450. doi:10.1007/s12369-010-0066-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Šabanović, S., and W. Chang. 2016. “Socialising Robots: Constructing Robotic Sociality in the Design and use of the Assistive Robot PARO.” AI and Society 31 (4): 537–551. doi:10.1007/s00146-015-0636-1.
   Google Scholar
• Troughton, I. A. 2022. “Affective Movement in Robotic Art: Alternatives to the ‘Interiority Paradigm’ in Social Robotics.” Body, Space & Technology 21 (1). doi:10.16995/bst.7963.
   Google Scholar
• Turkle, S. 2011. Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• van Wynsberghe, A. 2021. “Social Robots and the Risks to Reciprocity.” AI and Society 37 (2): 479–485. doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01207-y1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velonaki, M., and D. Rye. 2016. “Designing Robots Creatively. Robots and Art: Exploring an Unlikely Symbiosis.” In Robots and Art, edited by C. Kroos, and D. Herath, 379–401. Singapore: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Weiss, A., and K. Spiel. 2021. “Robots Beyond Science Fiction: Mutual Learning in Human-Robot Interaction on the way to Participatory Approaches.” AI and Society 37 (2): 501–515. doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01209-w.
   Google Scholar
• Yolgormez, C., and J. Thibodeau. 2002. “Socially Robotic: Making Useless Machines.” AI & Society 37 (2): 565–578. doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01213-0.
   Google Scholar