An Empirical Design Justice Approach to Identifying Ethical Considerations in the Intersection of Large Language Models and Social Robotics
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) in social robotics presents a unique set of ethical challenges and social impacts. This research is set out to identify ethical considerations that arise in the design and development of these two technologies in combination. Using LLMs for social robotics may provide benefits, such as enabling natural language open-domain dialogues. However, the intersection of these two technologies also gives rise to ethical concerns related to misinformation, non-verbal cues, emotional disruption, and biases. The robot's physical social embodiment adds complexity, as ethical hazards associated with LLM-based Social AI, such as hallucinations and misinformation, can be exacerbated due to the effects of physical embodiment on social perception and communication. To address these challenges, this study employs an empirical design justice-based methodology, focusing on identifying socio-technical ethical considerations through a qualitative co-design and interaction study. The purpose of the study is to identify ethical considerations relevant to the process of co-design of, and interaction with a humanoid social robot as the interface of a LLM, and to evaluate how a design justice methodology can be used in the context of designing LLMs-based social robotics. The findings reveal a mapping of ethical considerations arising in four conceptual dimensions: interaction, co-design, terms of service and relationship and evaluates how a design justice approach can be used empirically in the intersection of LLMs and social robotics.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 74 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jun 2024.
Builds on
17 of 74 references.
References · 17
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Model (LLM) Security and Privacy: The Good, the Bad, and the Uglycited by 387
- 2021Persistent Anti-Muslim Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 377
- 2023Gender bias and stereotypes in Large Language Modelscited by 187
- 2023Can LLM-Generated Misinformation Be Detected?cited by 177
- 2018The Design and Implementation of XiaoIce, an Empathetic Social Chatbotcited by 172
- 2020Participation is not a Design Fix for Machine Learningcited by 111
- 2023The Participatory Turn in AI Design: Theoretical Foundations and the Current State of Practicecited by 87
- 2023Unveiling Security, Privacy, and Ethical Concerns of ChatGPTcited by 53
- 2024Understanding Large-Language Model (LLM)-powered Human-Robot Interactioncited by 43
- 2023WinoQueer: A Community-in-the-Loop Benchmark for Anti-LGBTQ+ Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 42
- 2024The Typing Cure: Experiences with Large Language Model Chatbots for Mental Health Supportcited by 24
- 2023VITA: A Multi-modal LLM-based System for Longitudinal, Autonomous, and Adaptive Robotic Mental Well-being Coachingcited by 13
5 more
- 2019Embodiment in Socially Interactive Robotscited by 11
- 2024LLM-Powered Socially Assistive Robot-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Exercises: an Exploratory Study with University Studentscited by 6
- 2022Robot's Gendering Trouble: A Scoping Review of Gendering Humanoid Robots and its Effects on HRIcited by 5
- 2024How Can Large Language Models Enable Better Socially Assistive Human-Robot Interaction: A Brief Surveycited by 4
- 2023Contextual Code Switching for Machine Translation using Language Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.