English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Due to their unique persuasive power, language-capable robots must be able toboth act in line with human moral norms and clearly and appropriatelycommunicate those norms. These requirements are complicated by the possibilitythat humans may ascribe blame differently to humans and robots. In this work,we explore how robots should communicate in moral advising scenarios, in whichthe norms they are expected to follow (in a moral dilemma scenario) may bedifferent from those their advisees are expected to follow. Our results suggestthat, in fact, both humans and robots are judged more positively when theyprovide the advice that favors the common good over an individual's life. Theseresults raise critical new questions regarding people's moral responses torobots and the design of autonomous moral agents.

I Need Your Advice... Human Perceptions of Robot Moral Advising Behaviors