Did you know that a robot has been given legal citizenship and personhood? People are obsessed with lifelike robots and dolls. What makes us so fascinated with objects that resemble us? In this GKIS article, we will be exploring several types of lifelike automatons and dolls as well as the psychology behind our obsession with them. If you are unsure of how to protect your tweens’ and teens’ growing reliance on technology and obsession with online presence, Dr. Bennett’s Social Media Readiness Online Course will give you the answers you are looking for and help you to navigate through these ever-changing waters!
What is the difference between an automaton and a doll?
While some may use the words interchangeably, there is a huge difference between an automaton and a doll. Most importantly, automatons are mechanized robots, while dolls do not move by themselves. Another important difference is the trend to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into lifelike automatons. Artificial intelligence is a program that allows a computer to mimic the human mind, which allows it to make changes to itself. The advancement of artificial intelligence has stoked new interest and debate about morality and personhood. After all, the more advanced artificial intelligence gets, the more these robots resemble actual humans. It may not be too far off until we see a robot that possesses an actual consciousness.
Sophia
Sophia is one of the most famous lifelike robots in the world. She is an ultra-realistic humanoid robot with advanced artificial intelligence. She can hold conversations with people and has been on several press tours and has done numerous interviews where she converses with people and discusses what it is like to be her. She has even been on the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon. Honestly, it is pretty trippy to watch.
While the fact that she can hold intelligible conversations with people is impressive, it is even more monumental that she has citizenship. In 2017, Saudi Arabia gave Sophia citizenship, making her the first AI to be given legal personhood and human rights.[1] While this may be more of a marketing strategy for Hanson Robotics and positive publicity for Saudi Arabia, the fact remains that a robot has been given legal autonomy.
Erica
Lifelike robots are also being considered as labor options. Erica is a robot developed by roboticist, Hiroshi Ishiguro. She has lifelike skin, hair, and facial expressions. Like Sophia, she also utilizes AI to hold conversations, read, and recognize human faces. She currently has her own YouTube channel and appears on television in Japan as a news anchor.[2] While she can not move her limbs, she can move her neck and waist to turn toward people. Erica’s lifelike facial movements and ability to read and recite the news have given her a bit of celebrity status in Japan.
Sex Robots
Did you know there is a huge market for sex robots? Sex robots are lifelike, anatomically correct androids that are built for pleasure. These robots can be ordered to look and sound however the buyer wants. They can also be programmed to say specific phrases and respond in specific ways. They can also run different scenarios to simulate realistic experiences. Unfortunately, rape scenarios are available. If you are curious about sex robots, look out for my upcoming article here on GKIS.
Reborn Dolls
Reborn dolls are lifelike dolls made by artists, that usually resemble babies or toddlers. These dolls are extremely realistic and have garnered an entire subculture of fans who are dedicated to them. While they do not move, speak, or communicate in any way, the people that own them treat them as if they were real children.
Some people use these dolls for therapeutic purposes. There have been instances where mothers who have lost their babies have had lifelike dolls made in their child’s likeness to deal with their grief. They have also been used to deal with infertility, miscarriages, and depression.
Super Dollfie
Volks is an action figure/doll company that makes anatomically correct, hyper-realistic figures. If you are having a hard time imagining this, think Barbie with all the naughty bits. These figures are highly sought after by collectors and go for exorbitant prices. They are extremely customizable, and you can even buy clothing for them that is more finely detailed than most of the stuff in the average person’s closet. The attention to detail on these things is insane. All the clothing, hair, and body parts can be changed out to make the doll look however you want it to.
Possible Reasons Why People are Obsessed with Lifelike Robots and Dolls
People are curious by nature
People get lonely
People look for connection and meaning everywhere
There is no risk of rejection
Some people have social anxiety
Staying Informed and Keeping Your Family Safe
Dr. B is in a unique position to help you to learn more about the potential dangers that your family could face when engaging with the internet and technology. As a practicing psychologist, university professor, and mother, she can help you and your family safely traverse the digital world we live in.
In Dr. B’s book, Screen Time in the Mean Time, she discusses and attacks the issue of raising a family while safely integrating technology rather than fearing it. Also, you can download the free GKIS Connected Family Agreement simply by creating a GKIS account on our website home page. If you are looking for other fun and informative stories, check out the GKIS Blog. For other useful tips about how to make the internet a safer place for your family, you can get parenting and family coaching information, support, and other valuable information from the GKIS Screen Safety Essentials Course.
Thanks to CSUCI intern, Michael Watson for researching lifelike automatons and dolls.
I’m the mom psychologist who will help you GetKidsInternetSafe.
Since its inception and popularization in the early 2010’s, virtual reality technology has been used for a vast array of applications from education and art to engineering, entertainment, and beyond. Recently, immersive VR technology is also being used to address the issue of domestic abuse and violence in a series of experimental studies. The goal is to enhance emotional recognition skills and subsequently foster an increased capacity for empathy among domestic violence offenders. While this is clearly a deserving cause and noble goal, the question is does this application truly work or are we overestimating the power of virtual reality?
Domestic Abuse
Domestic abuse, also referred to as domestic violence or intimate partner violence, is characterized as a pattern of behavior in any relationship that is used to gain or maintain power and control over an intimate partner. This includes physical, emotional, sexual, psychological, or economic actions designed to manipulate, coerce, frighten, intimidate, humiliate, injure, or terrorize someone. Domestic abuse can occur in any relationship and affects people of all backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, and education levels.[1]
According to statistics published by the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, 1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men have been physically, sexually, or emotionally abused by an intimate partner in the United States. Various negative mental, physical, sexual, and reproductive health effects have been linked to domestic violence and studies suggest that there is a direct relationship between domestic abuse, depression, and suicidal behavior.[2] Domestic abuse is a pervasive issue that leads to distressing outcomes and justifiably deserves extensive research into ways to combat and prevent its occurrence. Recently, researchers across the globe have been searching for a possible answer to this dilemma using virtual reality immersion.
Empathy and Emotional Recognition
The role of empathy and perspective-taking abilities in mediating aggressive behaviors has been a well-documented theory behind the occurrence of interpersonal violence. Theories of aggression have suggested that the perpetration of violence against others is linked to a lack of cognitive empathy or the ability of offenders to put themselves in the perspective of their victims and understand their emotions.
The ability to recognize emotions in the facial expressions of others is a key component of effective interpersonal communication.[3] Studies have shown that domestic abuse offenders have a significantly lower capacity for recognizing and understanding the emotions expressed in the faces of others and even tend to misclassify emotional expressions.
The VR Experiments
Researchers have come up with the idea of using immersive VR technology to give male offenders the sensation of experiencing an episode of domestic abuse from the perspective of a female victim. The researchers hypothesized that the virtual reality experience may foster cognitive empathy in violent offenders by having them “physically” embody the victim’s perspective, an ability that they clinically lack. The overall goal is to investigate how the difference in perspective during a violent interaction impacts empathy and an individual’s ability to recognize emotional facial cues in others.[3]
In one experiment, a group of male offenders who had been convicted of domestic violence against women were assessed on measures of their emotional recognition capacity and compared to a control group of men without any histories of violent offenses. The results showed that the men had a significantly lower ability to recognize fear in female faces. Not only did they typically fail to recognize emotions, but they also tended to mistakenly classify fearful expressions as appearing happy.
The men were then exposed to an immersive VR program that was designed to induce the illusion of full-body ownership over their female-bodied avatar thus allowing them to have a first-person experience as a female victim of domestic abuse. The avatars’ movements were perfectly synchronized with the movements of the participants’ bodies. The participants first underwent a process called embodiment designed to strengthen the illusion of being the avatar where they looked at themselves in a mirror and interacted with various objects in the virtual space.
Following this process, a male VR character enters the space and begins verbally abusing the participant. The male character proceeds to invade the participants’ personal space and throw objects such as a telephone onto the floor. If the participant spoke up, the male character commanded them to “shut up.” If they looked away, the male character shouted to them, “look at me!” After completing the virtual encounter, the offenders were again assessed on measures of their emotional recognition capacity. The results indicated that after being embodied in a female victim, the offenders showed an improved ability to recognize fearful female faces and reduced their tendency to misclassify fearful expressions as happy.[3]
Does this truly work?
Research has suggested that virtual reality can elicit strong emotional responses in the user, especially those linked to anxiety, stress, and fear. Other studies have found that some virtual reality programs can promote pro-social behavior among users, but only to a limited extent.[4]
While the results of this study indicated that VR may have promising applications for decreasing re-offenses among perpetrators of domestic abuse, similar studies have reached different conclusions. For example, studies have been published that show that virtual reality is not effective in generating long-term cognitive empathy that allows an individual to identify, understand, and relate to the emotions of others in various contexts. Other studies regarding VR and domestic violence have reported successful results in promoting cognitive empathy.[4] Further extensive, empirical, and peer-reviewed studies must be conducted to fully conclude if VR is a viable tool for addressing violent behaviors among domestic abuse offenders and if so, to what extent it works and how.
GKIS Resources
If you enjoyed reading this article, check out the GKIS Blog for many other articles on a wide array of interesting topics such as gaming, GKIS recommendations, impacts of social media, news-worthy stories, screen safety, popular apps, and so much more. You can also check out Dr. Tracy Bennett’s book, Screen Time in the Mean Time: A Parenting Guide to Get Kids and Teens Internet Safe for family-tested parenting strategies that will help you build the tools you need to help your family navigate today’s technological pitfalls.
Thanks to CSUCI intern, Mackenzie Morrow for researching the use of VR for combatting domestic violence and co-authoring this article.
I’m the mom psychologist who will help you GetKidsInternetSafe. Onward to More Awesome Parenting,
This morning I was invited to participate in the discussion, “How Parents Balance Privacy and Safety for Kids Online” on NPR WBEZ Morning Shift, Chicago. Host, Jen White, chose this topic based on a conversation she had when her best friend intervened with her 13-year-old son who took it upon himself to defend a peer against an Internet predator. Along with the other expert guest, Susan Tran from Depaul University, we discussed important issues that impact parents and families due to child smartphone use. Here are the highlights from the show, as well as a very personal story about my daughter just this weekend that shook me to my core.
Jen first asked about the challenges parents are facing in today’s digital age. Susan started the conversation saying that parents are concerned about risks like cyberbullying, access to unwanted content, and privacy issues like sharing too much personal information. I added that I’m seeing a spike in anxiety and mood disorders resulting from digital injuries. The danger is real, and parents need to do more, sooner, with better efficacy. Of course, if you are a frequent reader of the GetKidsInternetSafe blog, you are also aware of risks like health issues from screens like distraction from healthy relationships and activities (sleep, exercise, mindful eating), repetitive use injuries, and brain impacts (multitasking, mental brownout, addiction); interpersonal exploitation like cyberbullying, online predators, deceptive relationships (catfishing and hate groups and cults), and the encouragement of dangerous behaviors with pranks, online forums, and sexting; and exploitation for profit by selling violent or sexual content, product marketing, and cybersecurity issues. So many to talk about, so little time!
But there are also benefits. One benefit is the ability to monitor our kids for location and communication, real-time. This provides us with safety but also risks overparenting. In other words, parents can become too intrusive. I compared online access to a child wandering an airport. Of course, parents would want to know who kids were talking to and what they were talking about with strangers at the airport. It would dangerous for them to be wandering around alone, unsupervised. They face the same risks online. I believe we need to monitor most certainly, but we also need to let kids make their own mistakes and expand their independence by building resilience over time. We need to be there, slowly offering more opportunities for growth over time.
Jen stated that, according to a Pew Research report from 2016, about 48 percent of parents go through their kids’ text messages and call histories. Is it ever okay for parents to cyber-spy on their kids? My answer is yes to monitoring, no to spying. It’s difficult to know how to monitor, especially when kids push back with “I deserve my privacy” and “You’re the only mom who does that.” We give in to pester power too often. We don’t trust our gut and give them too much credit as digital natives. The truth is, with their immature brains and not a lot of experience yet, they can’t anticipate consequence and don’t realize how dangerous the world can be. They need us. Susan added that the conversation about child privacy changes with every generation. The key is having strong communication between parents and teens to navigate challenges as they arrive.
Jen’s friend called in and told her story about how she implemented strategies with her son, eloquently explaining the same process I experience with kids and teens in session. That is that kids will actually accept and even welcome reasonable limits, as long as the parent takes the time to explain their justifications and calmly negotiates the details. In fact, parent rules and supervision often calm kids down. Teens in particular often get too confident in their abilities to manage difficult online situations and get in over their heads. Having parent limits in place often provides them with an excuse to not get involved and even ask for help when they need it. This is the very dynamic that keeps kids devoted to therapy. Instead of firing me when I suggest limits, they are actually quite grateful. Setting fair limits is the first step to building an honest, open alliance.
Caller Kyle then expressed that he is totally lost and needs help finding software and apps for filtering and monitoring his kids’ phones. I shared some specific ideas, like setting parental controls on devices and through Internet service providers as well as setting privacy settings. Also buying third party services like Teensafe, Disney’s Circle, and OurPact can help. But the bottom line is, once your kids are instant messaging on social media platforms like Instagram and Snapchat, there is no third party software that monitors them. Instead, all you can do is collect usernames and passwords and check their phones regularly. Look out for secret profiles, as many kids have several in one platform (e.g., private and ultraprivate accounts on Instagram). Asking them to dock their screens at night, in your room to avoid sneaking, offers a regular opportunity to spot check. Please be honest about it. You don’t want to violate their trust. Besides, it gets them into the habit of realizing that other adults will see their posts and texts too, like other parents and school administrators. They may think before they post more if they see this as a possibility. If you want to monitor everything on smartphones, don’t allow social media.
As an illustration that it takes lots of tools and teamwork to keep our kids safe. I shared an incident that just happened to our family yesterday. We were at a volleyball tournament in Vegas with my 15-year-old daughter. When she was stretching and warming up with her team, a man snapped her photo without permission. The girls were aware enough (awesome) that my daughter’s teammate told the team mom. The team mom courageously approached the man and required that he delete the photo from his phone and in the deleted photos file as well. She also assured my daughter that she did nothing wrong. She had great concern that she would feel humiliation or blame and took efforts to reassure her. We were very grateful, wondering if he was a clueless grandpa like he said, or one of the 1:100 men out there that was a pedophile. Three hours later this same man was courtside with a telephoto lense during a game. We called security and asked him to stop taking photos of the girls. He apologized with suspicious insincerity and refused to wait for security. Security ultimately came and escorted him out for investigation, assuring us they have handled many cases like this before. Disturbing, yes. I was literally shaking I was so angry. It took awareness and trust for the girls and parents to work together for protection. For that I was proud and grateful. Another caller on the show reminded us to always keep digital evidence (videos, screenshots, and text strings) for law enforcement investigations.
How do we get past teen hesitation to talk to adults? Parents must get empowered and digitally literate by reading articles like those offered on the GetKidsInternetSafe blog. Around the dinner table (with devices in the basket), tell stories and ask their opinions. They will tell you stories in response. Viola! The cooperative dialogue has begun. Bidirectional learning overtime strengthens relationships and creates lots of learning opportunities.
When should kids get a smartphone? Susan said it’s different for every family, but be sure to be gradual. Start with a phone that’s not connected to the Internet. I added that parents are slipping. We need to get tougher. Don’t allow kids smartphones until after they’ve earned good grades the first semester of middle school. This will require gradual evidence of the judgement and initiative they need to manage a very powerful communication tool. For some kids, even middle school is too soon.
We ended with caller, Lucy, reminding us that parents need to model limits and set the example. Show kids that they are the priority, not screens. Set the message young that face-to-face interaction and nonvirtual relationships are the priority.
Thank you to WBEZ Morning Shift for such an important conversation to build closer relationships and safer screen use! To listen to the whole radio segment, CLICK HERE
I’m the mom psychologist who will help you GetKidsInternetSafe.
Once again, America is mourning and devastated from a tragic loss of innocent lives at the hands of a school shooter. Yesterday 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz shot and killed 17 students and injured 14 others at his former high school in Parkland, Florida. He’d been identified as a threat to other students and expelled last year. Buzz Feed reported that both his parents had died, and he was known as a loner who frequently posted about his obsession with guns on social media. He may be the same Nikolas Cruz who wrote on Ben Bennight’s YouTube vlogger site in September, “I’m going to be a professional school shooter.” The FBI conducted an interview with Bennight the day after he reported the comment and again reached out to him yesterday. In response to the tragedy, President Trump tweeted, “So many signs that the Florida Shooter was mentally disturbed, even expelled from school for bad and erratic behavior. Neighbors and classmates knew he was a big problem. Must always report such instances to authorities again and again!” He promised support to America’s children, saying “We are here for you. Whatever we can do to ease your pain.” What is going on and how do we stop it? What do these shooters have in common? What role does gun control, mental illness, online radicalization, first-person shooter video game play, politics, and parenting play as contributors to this violence?
Like all “experts,” I have pockets of advanced knowledge and gaping blind spots. No single authority can tell us how to fix this insidious and complicated issue. Many of us even hesitate to speak out, as we know we will be diluged with trollish insults and inflammatory arguments. But let’s face it. We all have to get braver and speak up. Children’s lives are on the line and our everyday safety has been compromised. I believe there are many factors at play, many of which we can change to positively impact child safety.
Schools
In over twenty years of being a mom and treating kids, families, and teachers, I’ve seen school resources and policies change. We’ve moved from swatting with a paddle, to expensive team treatment plans, to expelling problem students with “zero tolerance.” Class sizes are too big, behavioral issues have dramatically increased, teachers are overworked and underpaid, and administration is understaffed. With one counselor per school (if they’re lucky) and a few school psychologists per district, at-risk kids go unidentified and underserved. By the time these kids hit middle and high school, they are too often suspended, expelled, or sent for independent study in response to problem behavior. This leaves at-risk kids more isolated with fewer supportive resources when they most need it. They cry out lonely, rejected, and angry; left to play first-person shooter games for hours on end with a team of other self-selected assassins.
Where’s the funding for education?
Mental Illness
I’m a clinical psychologist. That means I have a Ph.D. and five years of post-graduate training for diagnostics and treatment. I often get referred the more challenging cases for treatment. Psychologists are the only mental health experts trained for standardized testing and assessment. We are diagnostic experts with powerful assessment tools at our disposal. Even with years of experience and expert abilities, our accuracy for predicting violence is poor. The number one factor for violence prediction is a history of violence. Yet, many school shooters do not have a criminal or violent history. FBI officials agree that taking a threat assessment perspective is best for detecting potential violence, but there is no crystal ball.
Furthermore, even if an at-risk individual is identified, cost-effective intervention is hard to come by. In 22 years of private practice, I’ve seen either no or negligible change in insurance reimbursement for mental health providers. As a result, to economically survive our higher insurance and overhead costs, many of us charge client’s out-of-pocket for treatment. This results in services unaffordable for many families in need, including military families.
Where’s insurance reform and funding for mental illness research, assessment, and intervention?
Inpatient Hospitals and Prison
Federal and state funding for the treatment of mental illness has not been priority since the closure of state hospitals during deinstitutionalization in the 1960s – 1990s. I was a staff psychologist at Camarillo State Hospital in 1996 when my adolescent male unit was the last to leave. I saw mental health treatment move from a state-of-the-art research and team treatment facility to community mental health. Although I believe the intent for more cost-effective treatment was a good one, a majority of our chronically mental ill transferred from the state hospital, to homelessness, to the costly churn of imprisonment. Our most vulnerable citizens have been left to wander cold and hungry relying on the generosity of churches, not unlike the mentally ill in the dark ages. The money did not follow them, nor did the treatment. Instead too many of our mentally ill are in county, state, and federal prisons who offer little treatment. In fact, many of these inmates are put in jail as a mercy booking, meaning they’re housed waiting for the availability for too few psychiatric beds in order to get shelter and food. Not only do they not get treatment, they are also among the most vulnerable for assault by violent inmates. We have more people in jail than any other industrialized country in the world. The enormous churn of Americans going in and out of the prison system is a subject of intense debate for good reason.
Where’s prison reform and funding for the chronically mentally ill?
Violent Video Games and the Internet
Screen use has transformed childhood in all the ways detailed in my book, Screen Time in the Mean Time: A Parent Guide to Get Kids and Teens Internet Safe. One such way is the potential to be radicalized online, as evidenced by the raging manifestos of school shooters Dylann Roof in Charleston and Elliot Rodger in Isla Vista. From this radicalization comes a desire to go “viral” and be famous on the Internet, often in response to being rejected in nonvirtual life. Further, anger and hate are too often fed by unmanaged violent video game play.
Ninety-seven percent of teens play video games and more than 85% of video games have violent content. As with all complex psychological phenomena, different effects happen in different situations with different people. Thus, issues like content, time spent playing, and player vulnerabilities due to family life or mental health must be taken into account when considering effect. This makes for messy factors to control for quality research and controversial opinions about the risks of violent video games. However, meta-analytic reviews of decades of psychological research have found that violent video games can cause aggressive behavior, aggressive thinking styles, and aggressive mood, as well as decreased empathy and prosocial behavior. That doesn’t mean all kids that play first-person shooter games will be violent, but it does raise serious concern about vulnerable kids and overall empathy and prosocial skills.
Where are the laws that protect kids? In response to video game players committing violence, several lawsuits have been filed by private citizens and class actions claiming that video game manufacturers were negligent by selling violent content that is harmful to children. However, few have succeeded due to first amendment rights claims and insufficient evidence related to flawed research methodology or correlational rather than causal research. City ordinances attempting to limit violent game play by unaccompanied minors in public places have also largely failed. Law professors and psychologists continue to argue that the evidence is too flimsy to make solid claims that video games cause mass violence, particularly considering the fact that despite widespread game play, the rate of juvenile violent crime is at a thirty-year low.
Where is legislation for technology risks and psychological research funding?
Limiting Access to Firearms
We can argue all day if it’s safer to have armed school personnel or limit access to firearms overall. But I think there’s one thing we can all agree on in the wake of another mass murder by a semi-automatic weapon. How is it possible that a troubled teen like Nikolas Cruz can legally obtain a semi-automatic AR-15 rifle and enough ammunition to murder so many of his classmates? And why, if President Trump is focusing on mental illness as a primary risk factor in school shootings, did he repeal an Obama-era regulation that would add the names of SSI-registered mentally ill people to a database for gun purchase and background checks?
It’s impossible to overlook that his campaign received $30 million in donations from the National Rifle Association (NRA), leading him to say at their 2017 annual convention, “Only one candidate in the general election came to speak to you, and that candidate is now the president of the United States, standing before you.” “You came through for me, and I am going to come through for you.” If President Trump genuinely believes mental illness plays a role here, then how is it that he’s not working for more sensible gun access laws rather than helping his rich friends get richer? If only the rich lobbyists are being represented by our law makers, than what about American citizens?
Where is campaign contribution reform and sensible firearm access legislation?
Clearly there are no easy answers in regard to violence prevention. There is no single school shooter profile and no single funding option or legislation that is going to stop it. But one thing President Trump and I agree on is that meaningful connection is at the heart of the solution. We need to prioritize and fund issues that impact America’s children. No child in the United States should be afraid to go to school and no parent should panic when they see a district phone call. Character building starts at home, and we need to step up and do even better. It’s time we work collaboratively and make some hard decisions to curb school violence.
