Julia G. Stapels, Angelika Penner, Niels Diekmann, Friederike Eyssel
{"title":"永远不要相信任何可以独立思考的东西,如果你不能控制它的隐私设置:机器人的隐私设置对用户态度和自我披露意愿的影响","authors":"Julia G. Stapels, Angelika Penner, Niels Diekmann, Friederike Eyssel","doi":"10.1007/s12369-023-01043-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract When encountering social robots, potential users are often facing a dilemma between privacy and utility. That is, high utility often comes at the cost of lenient privacy settings, allowing the robot to store personal data and to connect to the internet permanently, which brings in associated data security risks. However, to date, it still remains unclear how this dilemma affects attitudes and behavioral intentions towards the respective robot. To shed light on the influence of a social robot’s privacy settings on robot-related attitudes and behavioral intentions, we conducted two online experiments with a total sample of N = 320 German university students. We hypothesized that strict privacy settings compared to lenient privacy settings of a social robot would result in more favorable attitudes and behavioral intentions towards the robot in Experiment 1. For Experiment 2, we expected more favorable attitudes and behavioral intentions for choosing independently the robot’s privacy settings in comparison to evaluating preset privacy settings. However, those two manipulations seemed to influence attitudes towards the robot in diverging domains: While strict privacy settings increased trust, decreased subjective ambivalence and increased the willingness to self-disclose compared to lenient privacy settings, the choice of privacy settings seemed to primarily impact robot likeability, contact intentions and the depth of potential self-disclosure. Strict compared to lenient privacy settings might reduce the risk associated with robot contact and thereby also reduce risk-related attitudes and increase trust-dependent behavioral intentions. However, if allowed to choose, people make the robot ‘their own’, through making a privacy-utility tradeoff. This tradeoff is likely a compromise between full privacy and full utility and thus does not reduce risks of robot-contact as much as strict privacy settings do. Future experiments should replicate these results using real-life human robot interaction and different scenarios to further investigate the psychological mechanisms causing such divergences.","PeriodicalId":14361,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Robotics","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Never Trust Anything That Can Think for Itself, if You Can’t Control Its Privacy Settings: The Influence of a Robot’s Privacy Settings on Users’ Attitudes and Willingness to Self-disclose\",\"authors\":\"Julia G. Stapels, Angelika Penner, Niels Diekmann, Friederike Eyssel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12369-023-01043-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract When encountering social robots, potential users are often facing a dilemma between privacy and utility. That is, high utility often comes at the cost of lenient privacy settings, allowing the robot to store personal data and to connect to the internet permanently, which brings in associated data security risks. However, to date, it still remains unclear how this dilemma affects attitudes and behavioral intentions towards the respective robot. To shed light on the influence of a social robot’s privacy settings on robot-related attitudes and behavioral intentions, we conducted two online experiments with a total sample of N = 320 German university students. We hypothesized that strict privacy settings compared to lenient privacy settings of a social robot would result in more favorable attitudes and behavioral intentions towards the robot in Experiment 1. For Experiment 2, we expected more favorable attitudes and behavioral intentions for choosing independently the robot’s privacy settings in comparison to evaluating preset privacy settings. However, those two manipulations seemed to influence attitudes towards the robot in diverging domains: While strict privacy settings increased trust, decreased subjective ambivalence and increased the willingness to self-disclose compared to lenient privacy settings, the choice of privacy settings seemed to primarily impact robot likeability, contact intentions and the depth of potential self-disclosure. Strict compared to lenient privacy settings might reduce the risk associated with robot contact and thereby also reduce risk-related attitudes and increase trust-dependent behavioral intentions. However, if allowed to choose, people make the robot ‘their own’, through making a privacy-utility tradeoff. This tradeoff is likely a compromise between full privacy and full utility and thus does not reduce risks of robot-contact as much as strict privacy settings do. Future experiments should replicate these results using real-life human robot interaction and different scenarios to further investigate the psychological mechanisms causing such divergences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Social Robotics\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Social Robotics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-023-01043-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ROBOTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Robotics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-023-01043-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ROBOTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Never Trust Anything That Can Think for Itself, if You Can’t Control Its Privacy Settings: The Influence of a Robot’s Privacy Settings on Users’ Attitudes and Willingness to Self-disclose
Abstract When encountering social robots, potential users are often facing a dilemma between privacy and utility. That is, high utility often comes at the cost of lenient privacy settings, allowing the robot to store personal data and to connect to the internet permanently, which brings in associated data security risks. However, to date, it still remains unclear how this dilemma affects attitudes and behavioral intentions towards the respective robot. To shed light on the influence of a social robot’s privacy settings on robot-related attitudes and behavioral intentions, we conducted two online experiments with a total sample of N = 320 German university students. We hypothesized that strict privacy settings compared to lenient privacy settings of a social robot would result in more favorable attitudes and behavioral intentions towards the robot in Experiment 1. For Experiment 2, we expected more favorable attitudes and behavioral intentions for choosing independently the robot’s privacy settings in comparison to evaluating preset privacy settings. However, those two manipulations seemed to influence attitudes towards the robot in diverging domains: While strict privacy settings increased trust, decreased subjective ambivalence and increased the willingness to self-disclose compared to lenient privacy settings, the choice of privacy settings seemed to primarily impact robot likeability, contact intentions and the depth of potential self-disclosure. Strict compared to lenient privacy settings might reduce the risk associated with robot contact and thereby also reduce risk-related attitudes and increase trust-dependent behavioral intentions. However, if allowed to choose, people make the robot ‘their own’, through making a privacy-utility tradeoff. This tradeoff is likely a compromise between full privacy and full utility and thus does not reduce risks of robot-contact as much as strict privacy settings do. Future experiments should replicate these results using real-life human robot interaction and different scenarios to further investigate the psychological mechanisms causing such divergences.
期刊介绍:
Social Robotics is the study of robots that are able to interact and communicate among themselves, with humans, and with the environment, within the social and cultural structure attached to its role. The journal covers a broad spectrum of topics related to the latest technologies, new research results and developments in the area of social robotics on all levels, from developments in core enabling technologies to system integration, aesthetic design, applications and social implications. It provides a platform for like-minded researchers to present their findings and latest developments in social robotics, covering relevant advances in engineering, computing, arts and social sciences.
The journal publishes original, peer reviewed articles and contributions on innovative ideas and concepts, new discoveries and improvements, as well as novel applications, by leading researchers and developers regarding the latest fundamental advances in the core technologies that form the backbone of social robotics, distinguished developmental projects in the area, as well as seminal works in aesthetic design, ethics and philosophy, studies on social impact and influence, pertaining to social robotics.