Ascribing consciousness to artificial intelligence: human-AI interaction and its carry-over effects on human-human interaction

Abstract

The question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) can be considered conscious and therefore should be evaluated through a moral lens has surfaced in recent years. In this paper, we argue that whether AI is conscious is less of a concern than the fact that AI can be considered conscious by users during human-AI interaction, because this ascription of consciousness can lead to carry-over effects on human-human interaction. When AI is viewed as conscious like a human, then how people treat AI appears to carry over into how they treat other people due to activating schemas that are congruent to those activated during interactions with humans. In light of this potential, we might consider regulating how we treat AI, or how we build AI to evoke certain kinds of treatment from users, but not because AI is inherently sentient. This argument focuses on humanlike, social actor AI such as chatbots, digital voice assistants, and social robots. In the first part of the paper, we provide evidence for carry-over effects between perceptions of AI consciousness and behavior toward humans through literature on human-computer interaction, human-AI interaction, and the psychology of artificial agents. In the second part of the paper, we detail how the mechanism of schema activation can allow us to test consciousness perception as a driver of carry-over effects between human-AI interaction and human-human interaction. In essence, perceiving AI as conscious like a human, thereby activating congruent mind schemas during interaction, is a driver for behaviors and perceptions of AI that can carry over into how we treat humans. Therefore, the fact that people can ascribe humanlike consciousness to AI is worth considering, and moral protection for AI is also worth considering, regardless of AI’s inherent conscious or moral status.

Artificial Intelligence as a New Field of Activity for Applied Social Psychology – A Reasoning for Broadening the Scope

“…Conversely, an AI system that serves as a therapist (see above) models respectful and empathetic behavior can serve as a positive influence on users' interactions with others. Therefore, in line with Gambino et al [24], we argue that the requirements of the AI do not only influence our communication style and behavior towards the AI itself [31,32] but also towards other people when certain communication styles and behaviors are practiced and internalized (see also [3])…”

“…In addition, Gambino et al [8] noted the possibility of a reserved effect, whereby interactions with social agents may shape ensuing human-human interactions. This is supported by recent work by Guingrich and Graziano, who argue that schema activation may lead persons to ascribe consciousness to AI systems, which in turn affects the way other humans are treated [3]. Given these developments, it becomes crucial to 2 examine how AI influences our daily lives and relationships, particularly concerning text-and speech-based output irrespective of underlying technical complexities.…”

“…It may become more complicated to interact with other individuals in real life who naturally do not bring the same level of empathy as the AI does. We argue that it needs more research in this field, for instance longitudinal studies that examine how individual interaction may change when continually using a highly adaptive and responsive AI (in this realm, see also [3]). It may be that such studies reveal that the preservation of social skills is a crucial skill that should be considered from an ethical perspective when designing personalized AIs.…”

“…We do not assume any semantic understanding. Research started addressing human-AI relationships (e.g., friendships, romantic or therapeutic relationships) [3][4][5] wherein individuals develop emotional attachments to conversational agents like chatbots, highlighting the potential implications of prolonged engagement with anthropomorphized algorithms. The interest in researching the interaction with social agents is not a recent phenomenon.…”

P(doom) versus AI optimism: attitudes toward artificial intelligence and the factors that shape them

“…Results from studies on mind perception and attitudes toward AI can be contradictory, however. Some studies indicated that perceiving mind in AI related to acceptance of AI, whereas others suggested that it related to fear or discomfort [46][47][48][49][50][51]. The extent to which someone perceives AI as having a mind may be particularly related to the personality of the individual, rather than to the features of the AI agent in the study.…”