研究机器人停服对儿童情感伤害的责任分配，提出共享责任框架。
I don't Want You to Die: A Shared Responsibility Framework for Safeguarding Child-Robot Companionship
- 基于72名美国受访者调查，分析责任归属的多方共识与分歧。
- 发现公司、家长、政府及开发者共同承担停服责任，但受意识形态与育儿状态影响。
- 为设计与政策提供依据，减少机器人服务终止带来的心理伤害。
社交机器人如Moxie旨在与儿童建立深厚情感纽带，但其服务突然终止可能引发儿童严重困扰与情绪创伤。当服务中断时，责任归属问题变得复杂。本研究以Moxie停服事件为案例，通过对72名美国参与者进行定性调查，发现责任被视为由机器人公司、父母、开发者及政府共同承担。然而，责任认知受政治意识形态和是否为人父母的影响而存在差异。对于服务是否应持续，受访者意见高度分化：支持者提出技术、资金与政府支持等延续路径；反对者则强调商业现实及过度情感依赖的风险。本研究构建了一个基于实证的共享责任框架，揭示责任分配与争议机制，为缓解机器人服务终止带来的情感伤害提供了具体的设计与政策启示。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Social robots like Moxie are designed to form strong emotional bonds with children, but their abrupt discontinuation can cause significant struggles and distress to children. When these services end, the resulting harm raises complex questions of who bears responsibility when children's emotional bonds are broken. Using the Moxie shutdown as a case study through a qualitative survey of 72 U.S. participants, our findings show that the responsibility is viewed as a shared duty across the robot company, parents, developers, and government. However, these attributions varied by political ideology and parental status of whether they have children. Participants' perceptions of whether the robot service should continue are highly polarized; supporters propose technical, financial, and governmental pathways for continuity, while opponents cite business realities and risks of unhealthy emotional dependency. Ultimately, this research contributes an empirically grounded shared responsibility framework for safeguarding child-robot companionship by detailing how accountability is distributed and contested, informing concrete design and policy implications to mitigate the emotional harm of robot discontinuation.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。