Affiliation:
1. University of Washington, USA
Abstract
This chapter provides a critical analysis of the potential short- and long-term cultural, emotional, and ethical outcomes facing Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) specialists working closely with anthropomorphic robots in daily team situations as viewed through the interdisciplinary lens of Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) research. Effective small group communication and decision-making is especially critical for EOD teams. Communication failures cause immediate safety concerns, potential physical and psychological harm to EOD team members, and similar repercussions for any individuals in close physical proximity of the Unexploded Ordnance (UXO). The complexity of EOD Team duties, coupled with the inherent limitations of human performance, make it gravely important that technicians have tools that aid rather than hamper team goals. The U.S. Military is seeking a refinement of EOD robot design, including the incorporation of some humanlike characteristics such as biped design, upright walking ability, and responsiveness to human voice and gesture commands. These characteristics can be arguably useful for robots to move in human spaces, learn in a humanlike way, dexterously disarm munitions, and communicate efficiently with human users. But while humanoid design may move the role of the robot to one that becomes potentially more effective in some environments, it may complicate emotional and ethical issues in terms of how human team members view the robot – as an extension of self, an external tool, a team member, a pet, or other entity.
Reference109 articles.
1. Air Land Sea Application Center. (2001, February). EOD multiservice procedures for Explosive Ordnance Disposal in a joint environment. Langley AFB, VA: ALSAC. General Dennis J. Reimer Training and Doctrine Digital Library. Retrieved from www.adtdl.army.mil
2. Army, U. S. (Producer). (2010). Inside look at 89 D--Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) Specialist. [Recruitment video]. United States: U.S. Army.
3. Axe, D. (2011, February 7). One in 50 troops in Afghanistan is a robot. WIRED Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/02/
4. Bailey, C. (2011, January). EOD Officer progression, diversity of EOD positions, and advantages of being dual tracked. USAOC & S Newsletter, 41(2), 7-8.
Cited by
24 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献