Search

La science ouverte vise à améliorer la rigueur, la robustesse et la reproductibilité de la recherche en psychologie. Malgré la résistance de certain·es universitaires, le mouvement de la science ouverte a été soutenu par certain·es chercheur·euses en début de carrière (ECR), qui ont proposé de nouveaux outils et des méthodes innovantes pour promouvoir et utiliser les principes de la recherche ouverte. Les ECR féministes ont beaucoup à apporter à cette nouvelle façon de faire de la recherche. Cependant, elles et ils sont confronté·es à des obstacles spécifiques, qui peuvent les empêcher de s'engager pleinement dans le mouvement de la science ouverte. Nous, dix ECR féministes spécialisées en psychologie, issues de divers parcours universitaires et personnels, explorons la science ouverte à travers un regard féministe afin de considérer comment les ECR peuvent utiliser leur voix et leur pouvoir de manière unique. En adoptant une approche critique et intersectionnelle, nous discutons de la manière dont la recherche féministe en début de carrière peut être complétée ou remise en question par les changements en faveur de la science ouverte. Nous présentons également comment les ECR peuvent agir en tant qu’acteur·rices pour le changement dans un contexte de précarité universitaire. Nous identifions les moyens par lesquels la science ouverte peut bénéficier de l'épistémologie féministe et nous concluons en envisageant un avenir pour les ECR féministes qui souhaitent s'engager dans les pratiques de la science ouverte dans leur propre recherche.

[Note that this paper is now published at Psychology of Women Quarterly in the Special Issue on Feminist Psychology and Open Science https://doi.org/10.1177/03616843211029255] Open science aims to improve the rigor, robustness, and reproducibility of psychological research. Despite resistance from some academics, the open science movement has been championed by some early career researchers, who have proposed innovative new tools and methods to promote and employ open research principles. Feminist early career researchers have much to contribute to this emerging way of doing research. However, they face unique barriers, which may prohibit their full engagement with the open science movement. We, ten feminist early career researchers in psychology, from a diverse range of academic and personal backgrounds, explore open science through a feminist lens, to consider how voice and power may be negotiated in unique ways for early career researchers. Taking a critical and intersectional approach, we discuss how feminist early career research may be complemented or challenged by shifts towards open science. We also propose how early career researchers can act as grassroots changemakers within the context of academic precarity. We identify ways in which open science can benefit from feminist epistemology and end with envisaging a future for feminist early career researchers who wish to engage with open science practices in their own research.

A wealth of social psychology studies suggests that moving in synchrony with another person can positively influence their likeability and prosocial behavior towards them. Recently, human-robot interaction (HRI) researchers have started to develop real-time, adaptive synchronous movement algorithms for social robots. However, little is known how socially beneficial synchronous movements with a robot actually are. We predicted that moving in synchrony with a robot would improve its likeability and participants’ social motivation towards the robot, as measured by the number of questions asked during a free interaction period. Using a between-subjects design, we implemented the synchrony manipulation via a drawing task. Contrary to predictions, we found no evidence that participants who moved in synchrony with the robot rated it as more likeable or asked it more questions. By including validated behavioral and neural measures, future studies can generate a better and more objective estimation of synchrony’s effects on rapport with social robots.

In everyday life, we often observe and learn from interactions between other individuals –– so-called third-party encounters. As robots are poised to become an increasingly familiar presence in our daily lives, third-party encounters between other people and robots might offer a valuable approach to influence people’s behaviours and attitudes towards robots. Here, we conducted an online experiment where participants (n = 48) watched videos of human-robot dyads interacting in a cooperative or competitive manner. Following this observation, we measured participants’ behaviour and attitudes towards the human and robotic agents. First, participants played a game with the agents to measure whether their behaviour was affected by their observed encounters. Second, participants’ attitudes toward the agents were measured before and after the game. We found that the third-party encounters influenced behaviour during the game but not attitudes towards the observed agents. Participants showed more effort towards robots than towards humans, especially when the human and robot agents were framed as competitive in the observation phase. Our study suggests that people’s behaviours towards robots can be shaped by the mere observation of third-party encounters between robots and other people.

Purpose of Review We provide an outlook on the definitions, laboratory research, and applications of social robots, with an aim to understand what makes a robot social—in the eyes of science and the general public. Recent Findings Social robots demonstrate their potential when deployed within contexts appropriate to their form and functions. Some examples include companions for the elderly and cognitively impaired individuals, robots within educational settings, and as tools to support cognitive and behavioural change interventions. Summary Science fiction has inspired us to conceive of a future with autonomous robots helping with every aspect of our daily lives, although the robots we are familiar with through film and literature remain a vision of the distant future. While there are still miles to go before robots become a regular feature within our social spaces, rapid progress in social robotics research, aided by the social sciences, is helping to move us closer to this reality.

Anna Henschel’s experience in seeking out a board of mentors enabled her to build a powerful support structure. Anna Henschel’s experience in seeking out a board of mentors enabled her to build a powerful support structure.

Purpose of review: We provide an outlook on the definitions, laboratory research, and applications of social robots, with an aim to understand what makes a robot social – in the eyes of science and the general public. Recent Findings: Social robots demonstrate their potential when deployed within contexts appropriate to their form and functions. Some examples include companions for the elderly and cognitively impaired individuals, robots within educational settings, and as tools to support cognitive and behavioural change interventions. Summary: Science fiction has inspired us to conceive of a future with autonomous robots helping with every aspect of our daily lives, although the robots we are familiar with through film and literature remain a vision of the distant future. While there are still miles to go before robots become a regular feature within our social spaces, rapid progress in social robotics research, aided by the social sciences, is helping to move us closer to this reality.

A wealth of social psychology studies suggest that moving in synchrony with another person positively influences likeability and prosocial behavior towards that individual. Recently, human-robot interaction (HRI) researchers have started to develop real-time, adaptive synchronous movement algorithms for social robots. However, little is known how socially beneficial synchronous movements with a robot actually are. We predicted that moving in synchrony with a robot would improve its likeability and participants’ social motivation towards it, as measured by the number of questions asked during a free interaction period. Using a between-subjects design, we implemented the synchrony manipulation via a drawing task. Contrary to predictions, we found no evidence that participants who moved in synchrony with the robot rated it as more likeable or asked it more questions. By including validated behavioral and neural measures, future studies can generate a better and more objective estimation of synchrony’s effects on rapport with social robots.

Witnessing another person’s suffering elicits vicarious brain activity in areas that are active when we ourselves are in pain. Whether this activity influences prosocial behavior remains the subject of debate. Here participants witnessed a confederate express pain through a reaction of the swatted hand or through a facial expression, and could decide to reduce that pain by donating money. Participants donate more money on trials in which the confederate expressed more pain. Electroencephalography shows that activity of the somatosensory cortex I (SI) hand region explains variance in donation. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) shows that altering this activity interferes with the pain–donation coupling only when pain is expressed by the hand. High-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) shows that altering SI activity also interferes with pain perception. These experiments show that vicarious somatosensory activations contribute to prosocial decision-making and suggest that they do so by helping to transform observed reactions of affected body-parts into accurate perceptions of pain that are necessary for decision-making., eLife digest When we experience physical pain, certain areas in our brain that process bodily sensation and emotions switch on. If we see someone else in pain, many of the same regions also get activated. In contrast, convicted criminals with psychopathic traits have less activation in these areas of the brain when witnessing someone’s pain; they also show less empathy and disregard the needs of others. This suggests that a lack of this ‘shared activations’ may lead to problems in empathy. In fact, many scientists believe that shared activations are why we feel empathy for people in pain, and why we are driven to help them. Yet, there is little direct evidence about how the activity in the pain processing parts of the brain actually influences helpful behavior. As a result, some scientists now argue that empathy-related processes may actually contribute very little to helping behavior. Gallo et al. designed an experiment where participants watched videos of someone having their hand swatted with a belt, and showing different levels of pain as a result. The volunteers could decide to reduce the amount of pain the person received by donating money they could have taken home. The more pain the participants thought the victim was in, the more money they gave up to lessen it. During the study, the activity in the brain region that processes pain in the hand was also measured in the participants. The more active this region was, the more money people donated to help. Then, Gallo et al. used techniques that interfered with the activity of the brain area involved in perceiving sensations from the hand. This interference changed how accurately participants assessed the victim's pain. It also disrupted the link between donations and the victim's perceived pain: the amount of money people gave no longer matched the level of pain they had witnessed. This suggests that the brain areas that perceive sensations of pain in the self, which evolved primarily to experience our own sensations, also have a social function. They transform the sight of bodily harm into an accurate feeling for how much pain the victim experiences. The findings also show that we need this feeling so we can adapt our help to the needs of others. In the current debate about the role of empathy in helping behaviors, this study demonstrates that empathy-related brain activity indeed promotes helping by allowing us to detect those that need our assistance. Understanding the relationship between helping behavior and the activity of the brain may further lead to treatments for individuals with antisocial behavior and for children with callous and unemotional traits, a disorder that is associated with a lack of empathy and a general disregard for others.

As robots begin to receive citizenship, are treated as beloved pets, and given a place at Japanese family tables, it is becoming clear that these machines are taking on increasingly social roles. While human-robot interaction research relies heavily on self-report measures for assessing people’s perception of robots, a distinct lack of robust cognitive and behavioural measures to gauge the scope and limits of social motivation towards artificial agents exists. Here we adapted Conty and colleagues’ (2010) social version of the classic Stroop paradigm, in which we showed four kinds of distractor images above incongruent and neutral words: human faces, robot faces, object faces (for example, a cloud with facial features) and flowers (control). We predicted that social stimuli, like human faces, would be extremely salient and draw attention away from the to-be-processed words. A repeated-measures ANOVA indicated that the task worked (the Stroop effect was observed), and a distractor-dependent enhancement of Stroop interference emerged. Planned contrasts indicated that specifically human faces presented above incongruent words significantly slowed participants’ reaction times. To investigate this small effect further, we conducted a second experiment (N=51) with a larger stimulus set. While the main effect of the incongruent condition slowing down participants’ reaction time replicated, we did not observe an interaction effect of the social distractors (human faces) drawing more attention than the other distractor types. We question the suitability of this task as a robust measure for social motivation and discuss our findings in the light of recent conflicting results in the social attentional capture literature.