The positive–negative–competence (PNC) model of psychological responses to representations of robots

Robots are becoming an increasingly prominent part of society. Despite their growing importance, there exists no overarching model that synthesizes people’s psychological reactions to robots and identifies what factors shape them. To address this, we created a taxonomy of affective, cognitive and be...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Nature human behaviour 2023-11, Vol.7 (11), p.1933-1954
Hauptverfasser: Krpan, Dario, Booth, Jonathan E., Damien, Andreea
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Robots are becoming an increasingly prominent part of society. Despite their growing importance, there exists no overarching model that synthesizes people’s psychological reactions to robots and identifies what factors shape them. To address this, we created a taxonomy of affective, cognitive and behavioural processes in response to a comprehensive stimulus sample depicting robots from 28 domains of human activity (for example, education, hospitality and industry) and examined its individual difference predictors. Across seven studies that tested 9,274 UK and US participants recruited via online panels, we used a data-driven approach combining qualitative and quantitative techniques to develop the positive–negative–competence model, which categorizes all psychological processes in response to the stimulus sample into three dimensions: positive, negative and competence-related. We also established the main individual difference predictors of these dimensions and examined the mechanisms for each predictor. Overall, this research provides an in-depth understanding of psychological functioning regarding representations of robots. The authors find that psychological responses towards representations of robots fall into three dimensions: positive, negative and competence. They also examine their individual difference predictors.
ISSN:2397-3374
2397-3374
DOI:10.1038/s41562-023-01705-7