Search

It is now common for people to encounter artificial intelligence (AI) across many areas of their personal and professional lives. Interactions with AI agents may range from the routine use of information technology tools to encounters where people perceive an artificial agent as exhibiting mind. Combining two studies (useable N = 266), we explore people's qualitative descriptions of a personal encounter with an AI in which it exhibits characteristics of mind. While the situations reported vary with respect to type of both AI and interaction, a clear pattern emerged in the responses: the majority of people report their own emotions including surprise, amazement, happiness, disappointment, amusement, unease, and confusion in their encounter with a minded AI. We argue that emotional reactions occur as part of mind perception as people negotiate between the disparate concepts of programmed mechanical devices and actions indicative of human-like minds. Specifically, emotions are often tied to AIs that produce extraordinary outcomes, inhabit crucial social roles, and engage in human-like actions. We conclude with implications for ethics, the psychology of mind perception, the philosophy of mind, and the nature of social interactions in a world of increasingly sophisticated AIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Empirical findings on public goods dilemmas indicate an unresolved dilemma: that increasing size-the number of people in the dilemma-sometimes increases, decreases, or does not influence cooperation. We clarify this dilemma by first classifying public goods dilemma properties that specify individual outcomes as individual properties (e.g., Marginal Per Capita Return) and group outcomes as group properties (e.g., public good multiplier), mathematically showing how only one set of properties can remain constant as the dilemma size increases. Underpinning decision-making regarding individual and group properties, we propose that individuals are motivated by both individual and group preferences based on a theory of collective rationality. We use Van Lange's integrated model of social value orientations to operationalize these preferences as an amalgamation of outcomes for self, outcomes for others, and equality of outcomes. Based on this model, we then predict how the public good's benefit and size, combined with controlling individual versus group properties, produce different levels of cooperation in public goods dilemmas. A two (low vs. high benefit) by three (2-person baseline vs. 5-person holding constant individual properties vs. 5-person holding constant group properties) factorial experiment (group n = 99; participant n = 390) confirms our hypotheses. The results indicate that when holding constant group properties, size decreases cooperation. Yet when holding constant individual properties, size increases cooperation when benefit is low and does not affect cooperation when benefit is high. Using agent-based simulations of individual and group preferences vis-à-vis the integrative model, we fit a weighted simulation model to the empirical data. This fitted model is sufficient to reproduce the empirical results, but only when both individual (self-interest) and group (other-interest and equality) preference are included. Our research contributes to understanding how people's motivations and behaviors within public goods dilemmas interact with the properties of the dilemma to lead to collective outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a rich theoretical and empirical understanding of the relational dynamics between organizations within organizational fields, and between individuals (and roles) within organizational settings. Yet, the individual-to-organization relationship remains notably under-investigated. Drawing from theory in group processes, we develop a new set of arguments about the conditions under which organizations or their representatives become the focus of emotion and commitment generated by an interaction. We present [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Computer agents routinely replace people as companies' representatives to customers. However, few researchers consider the impressions customers develop about these computers and humans in the same organizational positions. I ask: how do customers develop impressions of the goodness and power for computers agents compared to human agents? I propose a theoretical model by which the agent's computer identity weakens social processes that lead to goodness and power impressions. This model explains conflicting prior research and proposes specific hypotheses for the current study. I evaluate the hypotheses with a laboratory experiment where participants believe they are buying products online from a representative of a real organization. I manipulate product quality to alter goodness impressions, the organization's constraint of the representative to alter power impressions, and human versus computer identity to test the hypothesized weakening interaction effects. The weakening hypothesis for goodness is not supported, while the weakening hypothesis for power is fully supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many propose technology as a tool for empowerment of lower-class urban students, but little research has investigated the relationship between technology and empowerment for this population. We investigate how different aspects of technology use and ownership could empower urban youth through increasing their self-efficacy. Instead of only a general measure of self-efficacy, we focus on several important domains related to STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) including technological, mathematics\science, academic, and general self-efficacy. Our investigation incorporates many aspects of technology use by considering first level digital divide characteristics such as ownership and general time use and second level digital divide characteristics such as specific communication, multimedia, content creation, and social networking activities. We use a unique survey of fourth and fifth grade students who were given a laptop, thereby controlling for the typical disparity in computer ownership and access among lower-class students. We found that technology use influences each domain of efficacy in specific ways, indicating the importance of considering multiple domains of self-efficacy. Most notably, frequency of communication and especially frequency of email use related to all four domains of efficacy and frequency of playing games related to general, mathematics\science, and academic efficacy. However, social networking activities had a negative association with academic and general efficacy. We conclude by considering the importance of multiple domains in self-efficacy research and policy implications for students and their schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How does interaction with computer or human actors change one's affective perception of them? Specifically, how do coercive interactions with computers or humans alter such impressions? "Computers Are Social Actors" (CASA) is human-computer interaction research from a psychological and communications tradition that posits that people interact with computers in fundamentally social ways. CASA research has been primarily concerned with how people interact with one computer differently from another, not how the interactions differ between computers and humans. Social exchange theory suggests how coercive behaviors alter affective perceptions of exchange partners, and affect control theory (ACT) predicts how perceptions of actors who coerce differ based on their identity as a computer or human and based on the observer's gender. I conduct an experiment modeled on a previous study by Linda Molm in coercive, reciprocal social exchange. I modify and extend this study by examining how exchange partner's strategy (coercive or non-coercive), partner's identity (human or computer), and subject's gender influence the subject's affective perception of her partner. The results support CASA literature with computer and human identities not differing in perceived affect, except for coercive computers who have greater perceived goodness compared to coercive humans. All coercive actors are perceived as less good by females than by males. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]