Institut für Soziologie
Using sociological role theory for investigating what we
know so far about the introduction of socially intelligent
robots in human work settings
Martin Meister
Department of Sociology
Technical University Berlin
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
1/20
Introduction
Institut für Soziologie
Aim of this talk:
Explore the idea to use sociological role theory to describe the sociotechnical changes that are induced by the introduction of social robots in
mundane human environments
Goal of conceptual proposal:
To allow (other than in STS) a comparison of single case descriptions
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
2/20
Introduction
Institut für Soziologie
Outline:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
A simple case
Role theory and STS
Illustration: Return to the simple case
Intermezzo
The case of legal ascriptions of responsibility
Desiderata
Conclusions
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
3/20
1. A simple case
Institut für Soziologie
Investigations of interactions with a vacuum cleaner in a
household
Unintended result of a study (Sung et al. 2010):
The introduction of “robots changed social roles in the house. They induced
collaborations among more householders to complete a manual task that
used to belong to one person prior to robot use (e.g., Mom for cleaning). This
finding suggests that even for a simple utilitarian robot, the ability to act
term acceptance” (ibid:
according to social rules can become critical for long-term
427)
Introduction of the new artefact led to changes in the distribution of
domestic cleaning tasks, e.g.:
•
Dad as technical expert (for what the robot cannot clean) becomes involved
•
Children have to be surveyed/convinced not to experimentally destroy the robot
(throwing it from the roof/drowning it in the basin)
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
4/20
1. A simple case
Institut für Soziologie
Rearrangement of the entire domestic role-set
Introduction of the robot changed
•
•
not only some single roles
but the entire system of organizational roles
in the household observed.
Levels of scale involved
Obviously, not only the organizational level is relevant, but also
•
Regime-level issues, e.g.
– domestic gender relations
– manufacturer-consumer relations
•
Micro-level issues, e.g.
– different (technical) cleaning capabilities of the robot initiates Dads technical
interest triggering his cleaning activities
– Children's diabolic experimenting (definitely human) with the robot initiates
(human) educational response
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
5/20
2. Role theory and STS
Institut für Soziologie
The STS-perspective on Social Robotics
Asking about the rearrangement of the entire role-set seems to be the
appropriate question for studying Social Robotics
•
•
robots built to (physically, emotionally etc.) interact with humans in their ‘natural’
surroundings
not laboratories, but homes, assembly lines or nursing homes
The findings of this simple case seem to be in line with STS-studies on
Social Robotics
•
e.g. the rich observation study Sabanovic/Chang 2015 about “robot sociality as
an emergent relational property of the interactions between the robot and its
social context“ (ibid.: 10):
These examples illustrate the ‘‘interpretive flexibility’’ of PARO’s sociality—its
ability to be interpreted in different ways by different social actors and
redefined based on personal needs of users and the institution it is used in”
(Sabanovic/Chang 2015: 12).
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
6/20
2. Role theory and STS
Institut für Soziologie
Two shortcomings of this STS-perspective
1. Perspective is conceptually flat
It remains unclear/metaphorically what terms like
•
•
situated mutual adaption
robot as social actor (Alac) etc.
conceptually mean.
2. Perspective is (mostly explicitly) restricted to showing that the use of the
robot shows interpretative flexibility, mutual adaption etc. for single cases.
This excludes more general descriptions/conceptual efforts, which are the
prerequisite for comparison and for building a state of knowledge over
many case studies.
This is where, in our view, sociological role theory comes into play.
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
7/20
2. Role theory and STS
Institut für Soziologie
The tradition of sociological role theory (in a nutshell)
Social roles are generalized expectations about behaviors that (more or
less explicitly) prescribed by position in a network of logically or historically
interrelated positions.
Every position can (at least in principle) be filled with any concrete person,
and because of its independence from concrete incumbents positions “do
not cease to exist when they become vacant” (Dahrendorf 1968 [1958]: 34).
Because of the interrelatedness of these generalized expectations in a
“position field” (Dahrendorf) or a “role-set” (Merton), every change of one
position affects changes to all other positions/roles.
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
8/20
2. Role theory and STS
Institut für Soziologie
Application to socio-technical networks/ innovations
Because positions/social roles are independent from any substantial
features of concrete incumbents (e.g. being a human actor), they can also
be filled out by artifacts (e.g. delegation of prescribed tasks to a machine).
But because of the relational nature of positions/social roles, any change of
one position constitutes the need of mutually readapting all relations of the
position field/the role set.
•
•
E.g. when delegating a role to an artifact, the entire socio-technical network has
to be readapted. Sometimes, role relations are inscribed in the artifact (the user
is “scripted”, Akrich), sometimes successful innovation is an emergent process of
mutual re-adaption.
In spite of asking about the replacement of human skill by “intelligent” machines
(the old AI-Question), the focus is on how the socio-technical network changes
by the introduction of new role players (robots) – and on how the old role players
(humans with their division of work and their hierarchies) adapt to the new
constellation.
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
9/20
2. Role theory and STS
Institut für Soziologie
Two Features of role theory beneficial for comparison
•
(returning to the stated two shortcomings of STS-studies on Social Robotics)
1. Role Theory can be applied on different levels of scale of sociality/ social
relations:
•
Micro-level (roles in interaction patterns)
•
Meso-level (organizational roles)
•
Regime-level (different bodies of actors; think of Large Technical Systems)
2. The same positions/roles in single cases can be described in more
concrete, case-specific terms or with more general concepts.
Both features are useful for comparison of/achieving more generaled
findings from the single case studies.
•
To illustrate this, I return to the simple case of the domestic vacuum cleaner.
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
10/20
3. Illustration:
Return to the simple case
Institut für Soziologie
If we apply these two features of role theory to the case of the introduction
of the robotic vacuum cleaner, on every level of scale, a more concrete
(case-specific) and a more general description are apparent:
Generalization
High
Low
(casespecific)
Basic patterns
e.g. distribution of
initiator-responderroles
Domestic division
of labor
Division of
domestic expertise
Gender relations
Manufacturerconsumerrelations
Interaction patterns
Domestic
distribution of
cleaning jobs
XX
Micro-level
Meso-level
Regime-level
Levels of scale
•
•
Regime-level descriptions are per se on a high level of generalization
Existing Macro-level discussions are about substantial qualities of robots (RoboEthics) or humans (comparison of national robotic cultures: Western-Japan): role
theory cannot be applied
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
11/20
4. Intermezzo
Institut für Soziologie
The original plan
Applying this scheme on existing observations/descriptions of Social
Robotics
•
still work in progress, but
Problem encountered
Existing descriptions/interpretations are
1. mostly not detailed enough for reinterpretation/ secondary analysis
•
e.g. for quantitative analysis: Broekens et al. (2009) concluded: “There is some
qualitative evidence as well as limited quantitative evidence of the positive
effects of assistive social robots with respect to the elderly. The research
designs, however, are not robust enough to establish this. Confounding variables
often cannot be excluded. This is partly due to the chosen research designs, but
also because it is unclear what research methodology is adequate to investigate
such effects” (ibid: 1)
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
12/20
4. Intermezzo
Institut für Soziologie
Existing descriptions/interpretations are
2. focusing on other research questions
•
e.g. the works of the group of Pfadenhauer (2014-16) on the introduction of Paro
in nursing homes. Here, the focus is on changes of self-description and
observables practices of nursing personal in a nursing home. They conclude
that there are – up to date – no observable changes in professional selfdescriptions and underlying nursing practices (as described in other – historical –
cases, e.g. Barleys seminal studies). There might be two reasons for this:
– Changing professional self-descriptions and/or practices takes time (mutual
adjustment of roles), so it might be simply too early to observes this.
– Focus of the Sociology of Professions is only on the relation of professionals
and lay people, and not on a larger socio-technical network, which may
restrict the empirical viewpoint. But look at the methodological
considerations Ziegler 2016 ...
but of course I have a second case that fits ...
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
13/20
5. The case of legal ascription of
responsibility
Institut für Soziologie
Problems for applying existing legal regulations to Social Robots
Beck (2015) lists “major challenges for legislature as well as for
jurisprudence
1. Wronged party (user/consumer) has to proof defect/misuse
•
Difficult if computer programs or interactions are complex and not
reconstructable ex post
2. Producer is liable for defects of/damages caused by his products
•
Difficult for robots with adaptive/learning capabilities. They react in unpredictable
ways – damage can result from desired behavior => They are no normal
products
3. Causing party (producer or owner) is liable for damages
•
Difficult to identify one and only one causing party in complex constellations of
development/ production => liability gap
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
14/20
5. The case of legal ascription of
responsibility
Institut für Soziologie
Proposed solution: “legal person ltd.”
Analogous to corporate agents: “creating a ‘tangible symbol’ for the
collaboration of all the people creating and using that specific robot” (Beck
2015)
and giving it by contract a legal status
as the address of liability
•
entered as a specific robot in a public register
•
“bundling of all the legal responsibilities of the various parties (users, producers,
sellers etc.)”
•
all groups involved (developers, manufacturers, users) make payments in a
capital stock
=> Robot as “legal personhood” can be held responsible under the terms of
the contract and civil suit
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
15/20
5. The case of legal ascription of
responsibility
Institut für Soziologie
Such a “legal person ltd.” is an interesting new position: an artificial
compound position comprising the whole bundle of legal responsibilities
If we read “legal person ltd.” as a general solution for concrete problems
•
though many of them are anticipated only
we can apply the same scheme from role theory:
Generalization
High
Low
(casespecific)
Damaged party vs.
damaging party
(including agent that
decides about these)
„legal person ltd.“
as compound
position
Law suits
Courtroom interactions
Concrete problems
of responsibility
ascription
(liability)
Micro-level
Meso-level
„repercussions“
(Beck) of basic
legal concepts and
solutions
XX
Regime-level
Levels of scale
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
16/20
6. Desiderata
Institut für Soziologie
many ...
did not go into case descriptions or conceptual proposals for the micro-level
•
literature on interactional roles exists in Social Robotics, generalization is an
issue there
and for the regime level
•
literature on the larger socio-technical embeddedness of robots/robotics is
absent from Social Robotics, a good ides seems to look at concepts of the
mutual positioning of politics, economy, law, developers, user groups etc. (i.e.
Large Technological Systems, Niche-Regime-Constellations/CTA)
and of course more rich case studies to be filled in.
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
17/20
7. Conclusions
Institut für Soziologie
I wanted to show at least in principle
•
that sociological role theory can be used to describe the changes that the
introduction of social robots bring about socially (changes in the position field
and the related roles)
•
that the role-theoretical descriptions can be scaled from case-specificity to more
general terms, as to allow for comparability
•
and that it creates sociologically richer descriptions if different levels of scale are
taken into account for the same cases.
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
18/20
Institut für Soziologie
Thank you for your attention
Curious about your suggestions
Martin Meister
Graz 10/05/2016
19/20