Trust is the bedrock of society, yet it is an essentially contested concept as well. While trust is vital not only to human interactions, but also to human-robot interactions, we do not know yet how to make machines/robots trustworthy, and what qualities are necessary for trust to emerge. In a future, where autonomous machines not only co-exist, but also co-habit our living spaces, we need to unpack and better understand such qualities. This is not merely a matter of ensuring appropriate functionality for the robot. Rather, it is a subject for cross-disciplinary discussions and explorations of the nature of trust. The virtuous, far-seeing, benevolent robot is currently the stuff of fiction. Our workshop “Can robots care and be trusted?” will explore the critical questions: what qualities are necessary for care robots to be trusted, and how will tasks be shared between humans and machines in care settings? The workshop looks at these questions from multiple perspectives. The speakers will also explore ’integrative social robotics’ and key elements of responsible technology design, development and implementation in different cultural settings.

As one of the most rapidly ageing countries, Japan is faced with a shortage of care workers and relatively low intake of migrant workers. Despite the shortage, the retention of care professionals, paradoxically, remains a great challenge. The environment in domiciliary care is often associated with heavy and challenging workload for little remuneration. Internationally, the sector is fraught with reports and scandals about abuse, neglect and low-quality standards of care in a facility. There is no wonder why people are concerned about the replacement of human care by robots, monitoring devices, and AI-driven technologies. In our residential nursing homes, we have experience of co-designing and implementing various types of robots and assistive technologies in the last decade. Based on this, my talk will re-examine what needs to be considered (i.e. opportunities and challenges) for the future of care delivery from the perspective of person-centered care and aging in place.

The rapid development of AI and social robotics has not only inspired high hopes and existential fears but also created a rather generic call for responsibility among public, policy makers as well as researchers. This call is manifested in the promotion of such ideas as responsible research and innovation (RRI) responsible research and development (RRD) and responsible AI, expected to provide us with trustworthy AI and technology more generally. As a response to this generic and widely entertained call for responsible development and employment of increasingly autonomous technology an ethics industry has developed. This industry provides us with a plethora of “products” on varying levels of abstraction carrying the promise of guaranteeing “high tech for the benefit of humankind”. In this talk I will argue for the view that dynamic institutional moral reasons sensitivity provides us with the conceptual core of such ethical methods as value-sensitive design or integrated social robotics. Furthermore, I will argue that indeed such reasons sensitivity is a necessary feature of ethical methods and ethics tools if they are to avoid ethics washing or ethics bashing. The general aim of my talk will be to bring conceptual clarity to presently rather undifferentiated discussion of responsible methods.

Understanding the simulatory capabilities of AI- powered social robots is crucial not only for explaining how they affect human mental health but also for conceptualising robot ethics. However, few research have shown the nature of relationships with and through robots using observational data from settings where robots are in use. This presentation addresses previously overlooked features of social robot sociality through a social science approach. The study included interviews with relevant actors as well as ethnographic observations of diverse usages of social robots in eldercare facilities in different sociocultural environments (France and Japan). Despite the robot’s artificial sociality, the research presented here confirms the ‘real’ social connectiveness in robotic care as documented in anthropological research. These findings can contribute to a better understanding of social relationships with and through social robots, providing some insights into the effects of simulated sociality and complexities of robot ethics.

Trust stands as the cornerstone of meaningful interactions within human communities. Similarly, the coexistence of humans and robots mirrors the challenges encountered in purely human societies. Drawing parallels to the widespread acceptance of pets in households, this acceptance hinges on principles like trust, predictability, and safety. Animals in our homes demonstrate predictable behaviors, recognizing our presence and adapting to our activities, fostering a safe coexistence. Notably, animals, such as dogs and cats, exhibit heightened awareness of our movements, contributing to both their safety and ours. This analogy extends to the human-animal relationship, emphasizing the significance of trust in navigating shared spaces. Humans and animals share a proficiency in detecting brief glances, using them for non-verbal communication and confirming predicted behavior. The talk delves into these parallels, particularly exploring the role of perceived awareness and action forecast in social robots. It highlights their pivotal role in enhancing perceived safety and contributing to the comfort of elderly users, echoing the fundamental importance of trust in human-robot interactions.