Hardware Companions? –
What Online AIBO Discussion Forums Reveal about the
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA • April 5-10, 2003 Paper: Digital Sociability
Human-Robotic Relationship

Batya Friedman
The Information School
Mary Gates Hall, Suite 370
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-2840
+1 206 616 2548
batya@u.washington.edu

Peter H. Kahn, Jr.
Department of Psychology
Box 351525
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-1525
+1 206 616 9395
pkahn@u.washington.edu

Jennifer Hagman
The Information School
Mary Gates Hall, Suite 370
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-2840
+1 206 526 0803
jhagman@u.washington.edu
ABSTRACT
In this study, we investigated people's relationships with
AIBO, a robotic pet, through 6,438 spontaneous postings in
online AIBO discussion forums. Results showed that AIBO
psychologically engaged this group of participants,
particularly by drawing forth conceptions of technological
essences (75%), life-like essences (49%), mental states
(60%), and social rapport (59%). However, participants
seldom attributed moral standing to AIBO (e.g., that AIBO
deserves respect, has rights, or can be held morally
accountable for action). Our discussion focuses on how
robotic pets (now and in the future) may (a) challenge
traditional boundaries (e.g. between who or what can
possess feelings), (b) extend our conceptions of self,
companionship, and community, and (c) begin to replace
interactions with live pets. We also discuss a concern that
people in general, and children in particular, may fall prey
to accepting robotic pets without the moral responsibilities
(and moral developmental outcomes) that real, reciprocal
companionship and cooperation involves. This research
contributes to a growing literature on the human-robotic
relationship.
Keywords
AIBO, companionship, ethics, human-robotic relationship,
human values, moral development, online community,
online discussion forums, robotic pets, social responses to
technology, user conceptions, Value Sensitive Design,
virtual pets.
INTRODUCTION
In this study, we investigated people’s relationship with one
of the most sophisticated deployed personal robots on the
market – Sony’s robotic dog AIBO.
This artifact – AIBO – represents the integration of two
long-standing areas of research within the CHI community.
The first area involves computer persona that exist on the
desktop computer or through voice interfaces, including
virtual embodied agents [3, 8, 23] and social responses to
computer technology [21, 22, 28]. For example, Parise,
Kiesler, Sproull, and Waters [23] investigated issues of
cooperation with a talking computer agent that resembled a
person, a dog, or a cartoon dog, or with a confederate
interacting through a video link. The second area involves
computational artifacts (without a persona) that link people
to a physical world, including augmented reality [1, 37],
tangible computing [10, 11], and telepresence [9, 31]. For
example, Ishii and his colleagues [11] have designed an
"ambientROOM": "a personal interface environment
designed to provide information for background
processing" (p. 173). The walls of the ambientROOM, for
example, are embedded with electric field sensors that
measure the amount of human movement in an architectural
space and represent the magnitude of such movement as
light patches projected on a wall.
By bringing both areas of research together – through the
use of computation to embed interactive persona into
physical artifacts – personal robots represent a new genre
for human-computer interaction.
AIBO differs from earlier artifacts of this genre. For
example, in contrast to interactive stuffed animals, such as
Actimate's Barney [33], AIBO integrates a reasonably
compelling persona and comparatively sophisticated
computation. Moreover, in contrast to working prototypes
in research laboratories, such as Paulos’ and Canny's
Personal Roving Presence [24], AIBO is a deployed
technology that has made its way into many thousands of
homes.
To investigate social responses to AIBO, we used, as our
data source, people's spontaneous dialog in online AIBO
discussion forums. Of course as an area of study online
communities have been researched for at least the last

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies
are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and
that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To
copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to
lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
CHI 2003, April 5–10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA.
Copyright 2003 ACM 1-58113-630-7/03/0004…$5.00.

Volume No. 5, Issue No. 1 273

decade. For example, researchers have investigated
whether online communities bring people together or
increase social isolation [20, 29], support empathy [4, 26],
impact identity formation [17, 34], provide substantive
knowledge in specific content domains [4, 15], and many
other issues, as well.
But it is only more recently that researchers have begun to
characterize the nature of discourse that occurs in online
communities to help answer social-scientific questions. For
example, Preece [27] conducted a content analysis of 500
archived messages from a medical bulletin board (for
people interested in knee injuries) by sampling batches of
100 postings at approximately two-month intervals. She
found, for example, that of the postings 77% contained
empathic considerations, 17% contained only factual
material, and less than 6% contained jokes. Preece then
used her analysis of the postings (a) to delineate stages that
people go through in moving from injury to recovery, and
(b) to develop a model of the recovery process.
The current study extends this emerging methodology. We
sought to generate detailed characterizations of social
discourse in online AIBO communities that, in turn, would
reveal important aspects of the human-robotic relationship.
We expected that in some meaningful ways members of the
online AIBO discussion forums would treat AIBO as if it
were an animal agent. For example, following Nass and his
colleagues [22, 28], we thought it possible that AIBO
would provide some measure of social companionship and
emotional satisfaction. Yet, based on other research
literature, we expected limitations in the human-robotic
relationship. For example, Friedman and Millett [6] found
that 83% of undergraduate computer science majors
attributed aspects of agency – either decision-making
and/or intentions – to computers. However, only 21% of
the students consistently held computers morally
responsible for error. Thus we thought that even if AIBO
evoked some of the feelings that people normally attribute
to a human-animal relationship, that a moral relationship
might often be absent. We also investigated the proposition
that robotic technologies are blurring traditional epistemic
boundaries between, for example, who or what can possess
feelings, establish an emotional connection, or engage in
companionship.
METHODS
The Artifact – AIBO [32]
At the time of data collection, two versions of AIBO were
available to consumers: the original 110/111 series, and the
subsequent iteration, the 210 series. The 210 AIBO weighs
approximately 1.5 kg and comes equipped with a pink ball,
which it can "see" through a CMOS image sensor (camera).
AIBO can walk toward the pink ball, and kick it (see Figure
1). Several other sensors are located on the robot,
including ones that detect distance, acceleration, vibration,
and pressure. AIBO has movable body parts – mouth,
head, legs, ears, and tail – for a total of 20 degrees of

Figure 1: AIBO getting ready to kick a ball.

freedom. (Note: Subsequent to data collection, Sony
released two additional versions. Compared to the 210
series, the 311/312 series is cuter and the 220 series more
futuristic; both have additional technical capabilities.)
There are two ways to interact with the 210 AIBO: through
pressure sensors and voice commands. The 210s are
supposedly capable of responding to as many as 50 voice
commands such as "sit," "lie down," and "shake" (in which
AIBO will lift one paw and the user may press a leg sensor
to garner a response). One can increase the tendency for
AIBO to behave in a particular way by gently touching or
petting AIBO’s head sensor; conversely, one can decrease
the tendency for AIBO to behave in a particular way by
sharply tapping the same sensor. In addition to physical
“praise” or “admonishment,” the 210s are supposedly able
to respond to voice commands by using phrases such as
"good boy/girl." (In our own 2-year-long experience with
three 210 AIBO's, the voice recognition system works quite
poorly; only on occasion did an AIBO actually respond to
our voice commands.) AIBO responds by flashing red or
green 'eyes' (lights on the head), which demonstrate "anger"
or "happiness," respectively. AIBO may also play musical
sounds, and emit whining sounds when "ignored" and
joyful sounds when "content."
Participants and Procedures
Data was collected from three well-established online
forums that discuss Sony’s robotic dog, AIBO. (We prefer
not to mention the specific forums so as to increase the
anonymity of the participants in these forums.) Pilot data
was collected from archived postings from each forum from
February 14, 2001 – May 21, 2001. The formal data
Paper: Digital Sociability CHI 2003: NEW HORIZONS


274 Volume No. 5, Issue No. 1