ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH

Labovitz School of Business & Economics, University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802

The Soul and the Machine: Humanlike Machines and Machinelike Humans Russell Belk, York University, Canada

Descartes attempted to distinguish the ensouled self from the machinelike body. Freed from Christian strictures, science has substituted the brain for Descartes’ soul. Although the Tin Man longed for a brain, computerized robots may already have one. As a result, humans may need to become machinelike in order to survive.

[to cite]: Russell Belk (2017) ,"The Soul and the Machine: Humanlike Machines and Machinelike Humans", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 45, eds. Ayelet Gneezy, Vladas Griskevicius, and Patti Williams, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 164-169.

[url]: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/1024498/volumes/v45/NA-45

[copyright notice]: This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/. How Do Humans Interact with Machines? Implications for Experience and Identity Chair: Eugina Leung, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Paper #1: Object Experience and Object Consumers with a theoretical paper on humans and machines interaction. The Donna Hoffman, George Washington University, USA first paper “Object Experience and Object Consumers” develops a Thomas Novak, George Washington University, USA framework to capture how consumers can access object experience with Internet of Things devices in the smart home domain. The sec- Paper #2: Automation and Identity ond paper “Automation and Identity” investigates how identity can Eugina Leung, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The influence preference of automation with empirical data in various Netherlands consumption contexts. The third paper “Touch-Sensitive Comput- Gabriele Paolacci, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The ing Interfaces as Drivers of Experiential Consumption” examines Netherlands how interaction with computing interfaces can change consumption Stefano Puntoni, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The experience with field and lab data. The final paper “The Soul and Netherlands the Machine: Humanlike Machines and Machinelike Humans” dis- Paper #3: Touch-Sensitive Computing Interfaces as Drivers of cusses the fundamental issues concerning how humans can coexist Experiential Consumption with machines and how technology is revolutionizing the concept Christian Hildebrand, University of Geneva, Switzerland of self. Together, these papers will advance our understanding of the Johnathan Levav, Stanford University, USA technological trends in the marketplace and their significance. This Paper #4: The Soul and the Machine: Humanlike Machines and session would be particularly of interest to researchers interested in Machinelike Humans technology, identity and experiential consumption. Russell Belk, York University, USA Object Experience and Object Consumers SESSION OVERVIEW Advances in digital technologies and artificial intelligence are EXTENDED ABSTRACT changing the world. In fact, we have come a long way in less than The consumer Internet of Things (IoT) has the potential to revo- a decade. Picture this: when Jones is on his way home, the smart lutionize consumer experience because consumers can actively in- thermostat already knows that and turns on the heating system to teract with smart objects. Hoffman and Novak (2016) have proposed automatically warm his house. Once he arrives home, he quickly puts using assemblage theory (DeLanda 2006) to conceptualize consumer some ingredients in the bread-making machine to make some bread experience in the IoT, focusing on the smart home domain. In this for dinner. Then he sits down comfortably on his couch to order a paper, we draw on that conceptualization to develop a framework birthday gift for a friend on his tablet. Just a few years ago, it was for understanding how object experience emerges in the smart home, hard to imagine this mass diffusion of technology in every realm of how consumers can access these experiences, and the implications of consumption, from the smart home to automation to touch-sensitive object experience for expanding the domains of consumer behavior. devices. A first step toward object experience is consideration of object However, despite the transformational impact on everyday con- ontology. The human-centric approach considers experience from sumption of recent technological progress, we know surprisingly the perspective of the human, and so precludes our ability to evalu- little about human-machine interaction in the marketplace. For ex- ate objects has having the capacity to interact with other entities, ample, does interaction with machines shapes our identity and con- enabling other objects or humans or constraining other objects or sumption experience? Does interaction with humans in turn create an humans. In a position consistent with the object-oriented ontology experience for machines? perspective (Harman 2002) that has recently emerged in consumer This special session brings together papers spanning different behavior research (Canniford and Bajde 2016), we argue that it is not technological contexts to showcase this exciting research domain. just consumers that have their own ontology; so do objects. The papers feature research on the Internet of Things, automation, A critical assumption in our approach is that smart objects, as computing interfaces and human-machine interaction. This special well as the assemblages that form from consumer interaction with session will contribute to the consumer behavior literature by pro- these objects, and objects with each other, have meaning on their viding timely insights into the value of technology. First, it comple- own and are something more than passive entities that consumers ments the literature on the consumption experience of technological possess with meaning (Belk 1988). Smart objects, possessing their products. Previous research shows that interaction with technologi- own ontology, equally exist alongside consumers in the relationship. cal products can create both positive and negative experiences (Et- Objects do not exist just for consumers. They engage in interactions kin 2016; Mick and Fournier 1998; Wilcox and Stephen 2013). This on their own and from these interactions, their experiences emerge. special session complements this research stream to present these But these experiences are very different from consumer experiences. experiences from different perspectives. Second, this special session To develop our conceptualization, we start with three proper- answers the call to investigate how technological developments may ties that define the ontology of smart objects: agency, autonomy and affect people’s sense of self (Reed et al. 2012). Recent research sug- authority. While it is straightforward to argue that the constructs of gests that consumers develop digital extended selves (Belk 2013). agency, autonomy and authority are relevant to consumer behavior, This special session examines how the rise of more sophisticated we submit that smart objects in the IoT also possess these character- technology, such as robotics and artificial intelligence, affects sense istics. Drawing on the computer science literature on autonomous of self. agents, smart objects have agency to the extent that they possess the Given the lack of research on these new technologies, new theo- ability for (inter)action (Franklin and Graesser 1996; Latour 2005), ry is needed in order to define foundational constructs and processes having the ability to affect and be affected. Autonomous objects and provide direction for future research. This special session starts can function independently without human intervention (Parasura-

Advances in Consumer Research 164 Volume 45, ©2017 Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 45) / 165 man and Riley 1997 and independently interact with other entities, the nature of consumer behavior, and its expanding domain, in com- serving their own agendas (Franklin and Graesser 1996; Luck and plex, interactive environments like the IoT. d’Inverno 1995). Smart objects possess authority when they can implement communication and decision-making with other smart Automation and Identity objects and with humans (Hansen, Pigozzi, and van der Torre 2007). We then define object experience as an assemblage that emerges EXTENDED ABSTRACT from all object-centric interactions, including the part-whole interac- Automation is transforming consumption. Innovations such tions of the object and the smart-home assemblage of which the ob- as GPS and food processors perform tasks that would normally re- ject is a part, the part-whole interactions of the object and the various quire people’s skills and effort, allowing us to accomplish more in smart home micro-assemblages of which the object is a part, and the less time. Whereas anglers in the old days relied on their experience within-assemblage interactions of the object with individual smart to locate fish, now with a click on a technological device they can home components. The main difference between consumer and ob- know which type of fish is in the areas and at which distance from ject experience is that consumers as entities are realized not only their boat. Across domains such as food, commuting and entertain- through interaction with the external world, but also through interac- ment, products are increasingly integrating automated features that tions inside themselves, whereas objects are only realized through improve their efficiency, resulting in higher utilitarian-driven satis- external interactions with other entities (Bryant 2011). However, faction. Bryant (2011) also notes that object realization likely resides on a However, our research documents a drawback of automation continuum, so we can argue that even though objects are not living, for the utility of consumption. Consumers like products not only for to the extent that they are smart, they actually can operate on them- their utilitarian-benefits, but also in light of their “non-consumption selves to a certain degree. This suggests that the properties and ca- utility” (Loewenstein 1999). Of particular importance for skill-relat- pacities of a smart object will dictate how it is realized in interaction ed consumption, consumers often use products to signal their iden- with other objects and the kinds of experiences it is capable of having. tities (Berger and Heath, 2007). When consumers are performing If objects can experience, does this mean they are conscious? Recent tasks to signal their identities, they derive non-consumption benefits work in neuroscience suggests that consciousness can be measured, from attributing the outcome to their own skills or efforts. By per- is graded, and can be found in small amounts even in certain simple forming a task that would otherwise be performed by the consumer, systems (Tononi and Koch 2015). Thus, object consciousness can be automation decreases the extent to which consumers can attribute quantified. However, while many believe machines will eventually the outcome internally, and in turns reducing the preference for auto- achieve consciousness, most think that machine consciousness will mated products. In seven studies in different domains (e.g., cycling, not be like human consciousness (Bostrom 2014). bread-baking) and with different approaches (correlational, experi- Next, we evaluate how object experience can be perceived by mental), we test the hypothesis that identity goals lead consumers to consumers. Because consumers can never have direct access to the forgo automated products in favor of non-automated products. Due exact properties of an object, they can only interact with it in the to the word-limit, we are going to discuss four studies in details. context of an assemblage. So, experience is constructed from that Study 1 documents the link between strength of identification interaction. We propose that consumers can speculate about object and preferences for automation with a manipulation of identity sa- experience through the mechanism of anthropomorphic metaphor lience. 338 Dutch students were asked to either write for five minutes (Bogost 2012a). In this approach, anthropomorphism (Epley, Waytz on what Dutch biking culture (vs. Dutch flower culture) means to and Cacioppo 2007) is applied as a metaphor where we strive to them. Then they were asked to read a bike purchase scenario and consider the object’s experience not from our own perspective, but make a choice whether they want to have a free automated feature by speculating how the object might perceive things from its own, which assists the pedalling of the biking task. We found that partici- (non-human) perspective. pants were less likely to choose the free automated feature in the bik-

Finally, we explore the implications of the concept of object ing priming condition compared to in the control condition (Mbiking = experience for consumer research. Marketing scholars tend to view 66%, Mcontrol = 78%, Chi-square = 5.79, p = .016). intelligent agents from the perspective of how marketers can use Study 2 extends the findings of Study 1 with a consequential them to improve the effectiveness of their marketing efforts to hu- choice. 406 lab participants were asked to finish a coloring task. They man consumers (Kumar, et.al. 2016). But, what if instead, we view a could choose either to paint with a color choice automated feature smart object as an “intelligent agent” which itself is a consumer that (paint-by-number) or to paint with the colors they choose. Then they can be understood and marketed to directly? We introduce the idea of were asked questions regarding internal attribution and identification “object consumers” to explore what it means to be a consumer. Ob- in creativity. Consistent with the hypothesis, stronger identification ject consumers can have the equivalent of affective responses, such leads to higher likelihood to choose to paint with the color choice as when Brad the Toaster (Rebaudengo, Aprile and Hekkert 2012) automated feature (b = .0.95, t(404) = 6.29, p < .01). The desire to is only happy when he is making lots of toast. Object consumers attribute outcome mediates the effect of strength of identification on can make decisions, such as when Amazon’s Dash Replenishment preference for automation (95% CIAttribution: [.18; .37]). Furthermore, service allows washing machines, pet feeders and printers to re-order the anonymity of the lab settings also suggest that our effect is not laundry detergent, pet food and printer cartridges on their own they limited to observable choices. are running low (Rao 2015). Objects consumers can participate in Study 3 rules out alternative explanations of expertise and per- consumption such as when, through a smartphone app, smart refrig- ceived outcomes and provides process evidence that consumers dis- erators can display the inside of her refrigerator to a consumer at the like automation because it does not allow them to attribute outcomes grocery store and suggest products and recipes contingent on what to their skills. 403 MTurk participants were randomly assigned to she already has at home. The consumer IoT is beginning to revolu- one condition of a 2 (bread baking identity: present vs. absent) x 2 tionize consumption and consumer experience in a broad and grow- (product: bread-baking machine vs. dough-mixer). Participants were ing range of consumer-facing categories. Object experience and how either assigned to imagine that they were a keen amateur baker or consumers can access it can contribute to a fuller understanding of given no specific identity instructions. Subsequently, they rated their 166 / How Do Humans Interact with Machines? Implications for Experience and Identity willingness to borrow either a bread-baking machine or a dough- and less instrumental. This change in consumers’ experience has a mixer on a bipolar scale. These two machines were pretested to pres- series of critical downstream consequences such as a greater sen- ent different degrees to which they allow to attribute the bread to the sitivity toward the benefits of hedonic product features relative to skills of the users. Afterwards, participants answered questions re- utilitarian ones, which ultimately drive greater shopping expenses. garding expertise and perceived outcome. As expected, participants These results highlight that the malleable factor of input-modalities in the identity conditions were less (equally) willing to borrow the of computing interfaces can profoundly change how people expe- bread-making machine (dough mixer) than participants in the no- rience even the same content and how they systematically change identity conditions (Bread-making machine: Mstrong = .91, SE = .18 consumer’s preference in predictable ways. vs. Mcontrol = 1.51, SE = .18; F(1, 402) = 5.80, p = .016 vs. dough The conceptual background of the current research is built mixer: p = .74). Additional analyses reveal that neither expertise nor around recent work on the role of preference modalities and the role perceived outcome could explain the findings. of touch as a driver of attachment toward objects (Krishna 2012). Study 4 aims at showing that strong identifiers’ resistance to A prominent finding in the latter research is that objects that are ac- automation is contingent on products being framed as replacers of tively touched, or come into contact with the self, are judged more skills. If the need for internal attribution drives the documented ef- positively (Olausson et al. 2008). These effects were found to be fect of identification on preferences for automation, automation even stronger for more affect-rich relative to affect-poor stimuli (Shu should be perceived more negatively when framed as replacing the and Peck 2011). These more direct forms of touch may even persist user’s skills. When automation is framed as allowing users to de- in the context of more indirect (or mere) forms of touch using touch- ploy their skills, strong identifiers should perceive automation less sensitive interfaces (Brasel and Gips 2014; Peck, Barger, and Webb negatively. 203 lab participants were randomly assigned to one con- 2013). Thus, the central proposition of the current research is that the dition of a 3 (no automation vs. skill-replacing automation vs. skill- use of touch-sensitive interfaces promotes more experiential (shop- allowing automation). Participants were shown an advertisement ping) experiences during a product configuration task and increase for a cooking product and asked to evaluate its attractiveness. In a the choice of more hedonic product features, ultimately leading to between-participants design, we manipulated whether the product more higher-priced products. was a non-automated cooking set, an automated cooking machine In Study 1, we examined the influence of touch-sensitive inter- framed as replacing the user’s skills, or an automated cooking ma- faces on actual customers’ product configurations in cooperation with chine framed as allowing for the user’s skills. These products were a large European car manufacturer. We collected data of N=95,886 pretested to show varying degrees to which they are skill-replacing car buyers over a time-span of 2 years and merged two distinct or skill-allowing. Then participants indicated their identification in streams of data. We combined the data of actual car configurations cooking. As predicted, stronger identification corresponds to higher from the manufacturers’ ordering system with on-site tracking data liking of the product in the no automation condition (b = .18, t(133) logging customers’ device information during the car configuration = 3.14, p < .01) whereas stronger identification leads to lower lik- process. In line with our proposition, we find that customers using ing of the product in the skill-replacing automation condition (b = a touch-sensitive (such as a tablet) relative to a touch-insensitive in- -.33, t(131) = -4.34, p < .001). Moreover, in line with our predictions terfaces (such as a desktop computer) configured significantly more about the role of internal attribution, this effect disappeared in the feature-rich cars (MDekstop = 19.3, MTablet = 21.4, t(95,884)=9.267, skill-allowing automation condition (p = .39). p<.001) which were ultimately higher priced (MDekstop = €52,461.82,

This paper makes several theoretical contributions. First, de- MTablet = €61,563.39, t(95,884)=18.05, p<.001). Although Study 1 spite the prevalence and the growing trend of automated products provides initial support for our proposition, the current results are in the marketplace, consumers’ reaction to these products have been likely to be affected by various self-selection effects of the field data. understudies. Second, while the consumer identity literature has fo- Study 2 was designed with the purpose to examine the pro- cused mainly on the product acquisition and display, this research posed direction of causality and to assess consumers’ subjective ex- takes an action-oriented perspective and highlights how identity- periences during a product configuration task. In cooperation with a based consumption relies on consumer being able to attribute con- European market research company, N=205 prospective car buyers sumption outcomes to their skills. Our findings have also important were pre-screened to own both a tablet and a desktop PC, and were managerial implications. In particular, our work offers actionable randomly assigned to configure a car for themselves either using insights into a number of important marketing decisions, including their own touch device or desktop PC. As predicted, the use of a targeting, product innovation, and communication. touch-sensitive interface relative to the touch-insensitive interface

caused significantly more feature-rich, higher priced cars (MDekstop =

Touch-Sensitive Computing Interfaces as €40,100.70, MTablet = €44,566.72, t(203)=5.491, p<.001), consisting Drivers of Experiential Consumption of significantly more hedonic relative to utilitarian product features (identified by pre-test), as well as a significantly more experiential EXTENDED ABSTRACT configuration experience which mediated the main effect on price This paper explores the idea whether the input-modalities of (95% CIExpConfig: [687.04; 2230.96]). novel computing interfaces change the psychological process, pref- Study 3 was designed to rule out a series of alternative explana- erence, and actual choices of the person using it. Do changes in the tions by using non-owned devices and holding screen size constant. input-modality of a computing interface systematically affect how A total of N=70 participants were randomly assigned to configure a consumers experience a shopping process, the products they choose bike for themselves in a lab setting, either using a touch-enabled or in response, and their ultimate shopping expenses? We explore and a touch-disabled tablet (with mouse input). In line with our theoriz- answer these questions in a series of field studies and laboratory ing, we find that consumers using the touch-enabled tablet perceived experiments across a wide range of product categories (automo- the configuration process substantially more experiential (MTouchEn- biles, spa packages, and custom-made bikes). The findings of this abled = 5.66, MTouchDisabled = 4.59, t(68)=3.923, p<.001), explaining the research reveal that touch-sensitive interfaces relative to touch-in- significant increase in consumers’ choice share of hedonic (relative sensitive interfaces render the same shopping task more experiential to utilitarian) product features (as rated by a pre-test; 95% CIExpCon- Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 45) / 167 fig: [.03; 15]).This study also ruled out alternative explanations via 2016; Brown and Ponsonby-McCabe, 2014; Goudey and Bonnin psychological ownership, processing fluency, and mental simulation. 2016; Landwehr, McGill, and Herrmann 2011; Lanier, Rader, and Studies 4 and 5 were designed to provide an experimental field Fowler 2013). They may also potentially be regarded as surrogate demonstration and a generalization across product categories respec- selves. tively. In Study 4, we conducted a field experiment in cooperation Robot selves frame two changes in the notion of extended self with a Swiss day spa. In this study, N=75 actual customers config- in “The Age of Robots” (Moravec 1994). The first is the prospect ured their preferred day spa package for themselves mirroring the that as we acquire personal robots to serve us, we will begin to think experimental setup of study 3 (random assignment to touch-enabled of these devices as extensions of our selves, continuing a progression or touch-disabled tablet). As predicted, the touch enabled vs. dis- from the extended self (Belk 1988) to the digital extended self (Belk abled tablet caused significantly higher-priced day spa packages 2013) to the robotic extended self (Groom, Takayama, Ochi, and

(MTouchEnabled = CHF 554.61, MTouchDisabled = CHF 328.89, t(73)=3.658, Nass 2009; Nishio, Watanab, Ogawa, and Ishiguro 2013). Fictional p<.01), which was mediated by the substantially greater experiential media portrayals help shape our hopes and fears regarding robots and as opposed to instrumental perception of the configuration process the extent to which we may identify with them (e.g., Barsanti 2014).

(95% CISequMed: [44.76; 184.94]). The second, and potentially more profound prospect is that these ro- In Study 5, participants (N=180) chose for each of 28 product bots will evolve from programmed tools to semi-autonomous and categories whether they would choose a tablet device or a PC with autonomous beings that can become non-human legal persons and mouse input to configure a product for themselves. Following the perhaps moral persons with selves of their own. Robots displaying binary choice between both devices, consumers rated each product their own personhood and selfhood go beyond issues of anthropo- category on a utilitarian vs. hedonic scale based on prior work. A morphic projection and offer a further catalyst for considering what logistic mixed effects model with random intercept revealed that it means to be a person or a thing. There are even forecasts that we consumers choose multi-touch devices for more hedonic product may someday soon marry robots (Levy 2007). Robots, whether as a categories (p<.01). However, qualitative interviews revealed that special object or an emerging subject, prompt us to re-examine our consumers were not aware of the effect that the device itself may fundamental existential concepts. have on their purchases. A related concept is “the singularity,” the predicted point at Overall, the current work contributes to the emerging literature which computerized robot intelligence overtakes human intelli- on human-computer interaction and preference modalities in con- gence, which according to some will quickly bring about the extinc- sumer research, highlighting the critical interplay between comput- tion of the human species, perhaps within the current century (e.g., ing interfaces and human perception (i.e., haptics). Contributing to Barrat 2013; Bostrom 2014; Del Monte 2013; Kurzweil 1999, 2006). prior work on consumer self-designs and customization, the current Developments pursuing Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), the findings also highlight a novel antecedent by revealing that the com- point at which artificial intelligence (AI) equals human intelligence, puting interface consumers use when entering the self-design pro- is a key goal in the advance of robotics. After that point is reached, cess can systematically affect their preference for specific product the singularity scenario holds that robots, unhampered by biological features and how they ultimately experience the process of a product evolution, would increase in intelligence and strength at an exponen- configuration task. tial rate leaving us far behind (Barrat 2013). One human response may be to become cyborgs. Cyborgs (cy- The Soul and the Machine: bernetic organisms) are machine-like humans. Although others de- Humanlike Machines and Machinelike Humans scribed the concept earlier (see Gray, Mentor, and Figueroa-Sarriera 1995), the term was coined by Clynes and Kline (1960) to refer to EXTENDED ABSTRACT internal and external bodily modifications needed for a human to sur- Where does the self reside? What makes us human? Can a vive in space. They began their article by saying that “Space travel robot, like a corporation, become a legal being? Can it become a challenges mankind not only technologically but also spiritually, in person? Such questions lie at the heart of this inquiry. They are no that it invites man to take an active part in his own biological evolu- longer questions of philosophy or science fiction, but involve very tion” (26). Norbert Wiener (1948/1965) announced that “We have real issues that we will have to deal with in coming decades. Is a decided to call the entire field of control and communication theory, robot still a possession or a tool as it becomes more autonomous? whether in the machine or in the animal, by the name of cybernet- Who is to be held responsible if a self-driving car has an accident? ics….” (11). Recent developments have shifted cybernetics from ro- Are computers becoming more intelligent than human beings? If bots to cyborgs with such as human enhancements as auto-adjusting computerized robots can learn, reprogram themselves, and repro- pacemakers, insulin pumps, and brain-controlled prosthetics. Today duce themselves, will they need mere humans? If not, can we hu- its increasing applicability to both entities is one indication of the mans enhance ourselves enough to keep up with our creations? With growing convergence of the two figures. But a basic difference re- biological and genetic enhancements and mechanical and computer- mains: cyborgs are augmented or modified organisms while robots ized prostheses, can humans in fact approach immortality? Can we, are cybernetic machines. alternatively, upload our consciousness to computers and the devices The figure of the cyborg was brought to prominence by Donna that house them? And what becomes of the idea of the self as ma- Haraway’s (1985) “A Manifesto for Cyborgs,” and especially in its chines become more humanlike and humans become more machine- reproduction as a chapter, in her book Simians, Cyborgs, and Women like (Black 2014; Johnson 2008)? (Haraway 1991). Although Haraway defines the cyborg as “a hybrid Consumers are likely to first encounter robots directly in the of machine and organism,” she also notes that it is “a creature of so- home, health care facilities, self-driving vehicles, and in service con- cial reality as well as a creature of fiction” (149). She was more con- texts such as retailing, hotels, and restaurants. The robots in these cerned with using the cyborg as a metaphor than a material reality contexts may or may not be humanoid (android if male, gynoid if (Best and Kelner 2001; Ranisch and Sorgner 2014). As a metaphoric female), but regardless, they are likely to be anthropomorphized boundary-straddler, the cyborg that Haraway celebrates is one that and regarded as human-like (e.g., Aggarwal, and McGill 2007; Belk collapses dualisms such as “self/other, mind/body, culture/nature, 168 / How Do Humans Interact with Machines? Implications for Experience and Identity male/female, civilized/primitive, reality/appearance, whole/part, Del Monte, Louis (2013), The Artificial Intelligence Revolution: agent/resource, maker/made, active/passive, right/wrong, truth/illu- Will Artificial Intelligence Serve Us or Replace Us? sion, total/partial, God/man” (Kang 2011, 304). Based on a netno- Minnetonka, MN: Louis A. Del Monte. graphic study, Bhattacharyya and Kedzior (2012) find three threats DeLanda, Manuel (2006), A New Philosophy of Society: posed by cyborg technology: humans giving up control to technol- Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity, London: ogy; humans using cyborg technology to control other humans; and Continuum. humans losing the essence of being human by becoming cyborgs. Epley, Nicholas, Adam Waytz, and John T. Cacioppo As Robots threaten to gain a soul, humans may be threatened with (2007), “On Seeing Human: A Three-Factor Theory of losing ours. Anthropomorphism.,” Psychological Review, 114 (4), 864–86. In assessing such possibilities, I outline questions for consumer Etkin, Jordan (2016), “The Hidden Cost of Personal research. Key consumer issues involve identity, intimate relations Quantification,”Journal of Consumer Research, 42 (6), 967- between humans and artificially intelligent robots, interspecies ac- 84. ceptance and trust, and safety and morality. I provide a conceptual Franklin, Stan and Art Graesser (1996), “Is It an Agent, or Just a understanding of these developments and urge consumer research to Program?: A Taxonomy for Autonomous Agents,” ECAI ‘96 address this agenda of issues. Proceedings of the Workshop on Intelligent Agents III, Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, 21-35. REFERENCES Gallace, Alberto, and Charles Spence (2010), “The science Aggarwal, Pankaj and Ann McGill (2007), “Is That Car Smiling of interpersonal touch: An overview,” Neuroscience and At Me? Schema Congruity as a Basis for Evaluating Biobehavioral Reviews. Anthropomorphized Products,” Journal of Consumer Goudey, Alain and Gael Bonnin (2016), “Must Smart Objects Look Research, 34 (4), 468-79. Human? Study of the Impact of Anthropomorphism on the Barrat, James (2013), Our Final Invention: Artificial Intelligence Acceptance of Companion Robots,” Recherche et Applications and the End of the Human Era, New York: Thomas Dunne. en Marketing, 31 (2). Barsanti, Chris (2014), The Sci-Fi Movie Guide: The Universe of Gray, Chris, Steven Mentor, Heidi Figueroa-Sarriera (1995), Film from Alien to Zardoz, Canton, MI: Visible Ink Press. “Cyborgology: Constructing the Knowledge of Cybernetic Belk, Russell (1988), “Possessions and the Extended Self,” Journal Organisms,” in The Cyborg Handbook, Chris Gray, ed., of Consumer Research, 15 (2), 139-68. London: Routledge, 1-14. Belk, Russell (2013), “Extended Self in a Digital World,” Journal Groom, Victoria, Leila Takayama, Paloma Ochi, and Clifford Nass of Consumer Research, 40 (October), 477-500. (2009), “I Am My Robot: The Impact of Robot-building and Belk, Russell (2016), “Understanding the Robot: Comments Robot Form on Operators,” Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE on Goudey and Bonnin,” Recherche et Applications en International Conference on Human Robot Interaction, March Marketing, 31 (2). 9, 31-36. Berger, Jonah, and Chip Heath (2007), “Where consumers diverge Hansen, Jorg, Gabriella Pigozzi, and Leendert van der Torre from others: Identity signaling and product domains,” Journal (2007), “Ten Philosophical Problems in Deontic Logic,” In G. of Consumer Research, 34 (2), 121-34. Boella, L. van der Torre, and H. Verhagen (eds.), Normative Best, Steven and Douglas Kellner (2001), The Postmodern Multi-Agent Systems. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 07122, Adventure: Science, Technology, and Cultural Studies, New Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum fuer York: Guilford Press. Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany. Bogost, Ian (2012), Alien Phenomenology, of What It’s Like to Be a Haraway, Donna (1985) “A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Thing, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s,” Socialist Bostrom, Nick (2005), “A History of Transhumanist Thought,” Review, 80, 65-107. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 14(1), April. http://www. Haraway, Donna (1991), “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, nickbostrom.com/papers/history.pdf Technology and Socialist-Feminist in the Late Twentieth Bostrom, Nick (2014), Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Century,” Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Strategies, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nature, New York: Routledge, 149-81. Brasel, S. Adam, and James Gips (2014), “Tablets, touchscreens, Harman, Graham (2002), Tool-Being: Heidegger and the and touchpads: How varying touch interfaces trigger Metaphysics of Objects, Peru, IL: Carus Publishing Company. psychological ownership and endowment,” Journal of Hoffman, Donna L. and Thomas P. Novak (2016), “Consumer and Consumer Psychology, 24, 226–33. Object Experience in the Internet of Things: An Assemblage Brown, Stephen and Sharon Ponsonby-McCabe, ed. (2014), Brand Theory Approach,” Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/ Mascots and Other Marketing Animals, Abingdon, UK: abstract=2840975 Routledge. Kang, Minoo (2011), Sublime Dreams of Living Machines: The Bryant, Levi R. (2011), The Democracy of Objects, Ann Arbor, MI: Automaton in the European Imagination, Cambridge, MA: Open Humanities Press. Harvard University Press. Canniford, Robin and Domen Bajdes (2016), “Assembling Krishna, Aradhna (2012), “An integrative review of sensory Consumption,” in Assembling Consumption: Researching marketing: Engaging the senses to affect perception, judgment Actors, Networks and Markets, R. Canniford and D. Bajdes, and behavior,” Journal of Consumer Psychology. eds., New York, NY: Routledge, 1-17. Kumar, V., Ashutosh Dixit, Rajshekar (Raj) G. Javalgi and Clynes, Manfred and Nathan Kline (1960), “Cyborgs and Space,” Mayukh Dass (2016), “Research Framework, Strategies and Astonautics, September, 26-27, 75-76. Applications of Intelligent Agent Technologies (IATs) in Marketing,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44, 24-45. Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 45) / 169

Kurzweil, Raymond (1999), The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Peck, Joann, Victor A. Barger, and Andrea Webb (2013), “In search Computers Exceed Human Intelligence, New York: Viking. of a surrogate for touch: The effect of haptic imagery on Kurzweil, Ray (2006), The Singularity is Near: When Humans perceived ownership,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23, Transcend Biology, New York: Penguin. 189–96. Landwehr, Jan, Ann McGill, and Andreas Herrmann (2011), Peck, Joann, and Suzanne B. Shu (2009), “The Effect of Mere “It’s got the Look: The Effect of Friendly and Aggressive Touch on Perceived Ownership,” Journal of Consumer ‘Facial’ Expressions on Product Liking and Sales.” Journal of Research, 36(3), 434–47. Marketing, 75 (3), 132-46. Ranisch, Robert and Stefan Sorgner (2014), “Introducing Post- and Lanier, Clinton, Scott Rader, and Aubrey Fowler (2013), Transhumanism,” in Robert Ranisch and Stevan Sorgner, ed., “Anthropomorphism, Marketing Relationships, and Post- and Transhumanism: An Introduction, Frankfurt: Peter Consumption Worth in the Toy Story Trilogy,” Journal of Lang, 7-27. Marketing Management, 29 (1-2), 26-47. Rao, Leena (2015), “Amazon Will Allow Smart Washing Machine Latour, Bruno (2005), Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to to Order Laundry Detergent,” Fortune, October 1, http:// Actor-Network Theory, New York: Oxford University Press, fortune.com/2015/10/01/amazon-dash-internet-of-things/ Inc. Rebaudengo, Simone, W Aprile, and P Hekkert (2012), “Addicted Levy, David (2007), Love + Sex with Robots: The Evolution of Products, a Scenario of Future Interactions Where Products Human-Robot Relationships, New York: Harper Perennial. are Addicted to Being Used,” In J. Brassett, J. McDonnell and Loewenstein, George (1999), “Because it is there: The challenge of M. Malpass (Eds.), Out of Control: Proceedings of the 8th mountaineering… for utility theory,” Kyklos, 52 (3), 315-43. International Conference Design and Emotion Conference, Luck, Michael and Mark d’Inverno (1995), “A Formal Framework 1-10. for Agency and Autonomy,” Proceedings of the First Reed Americus, Mark Forehand, Stefano Puntoni, and Luk Warlop International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, AAAI (2012), “Identity-Based Consumer Behavior,” International Press/MIT Press, 254-260. Journal of Research in Marketing, 29 (4), 310-21. Mick, David G. and Susan Fournier (1998), “Paradoxes of Shu, Suzanne B., and Joann Peck (2011), “Psychological ownership Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping and affective reaction: Emotional attachment process variables Strategies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (9), 123-43. and the endowment effect,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, Moravec, Hans (1994), “The Age of Robots,” Extro 1, Proceedings 21, 439–52. of the First Extropy Institute Conference on TransHumanist Tononi, Giulio and Christof Koch (2015), “Consciousness: Here, Thought, 84-100, http://www.ri.cmu.edupublication_view. There and Everywhere?,” Philosophical Transactions of the html?pub_id=1810, last accessed April 18, 2015. Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 370, 20140167. Nishio, Shuichi, Tetsuya Watanabe, Kohei Ogawa, and Hiroshi Weiner Norbert (1948/1965), Cybernetics or Control and Ishiguro (2013), “Body Ownership Transfer to Teleoperated Communication in the Animal and the Machine, 2nd ed., Android Robot,” Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, 31 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (9), 854-857. Wilcox, Keith and Andrew T. Stephen (2013), “Are Close Friends Olausson, Håkan W., Jonathan Cole, Åke Vallbo, Francis McGlone, the Enemy? Online Social Networks, Self-Esteem, and Self- Mikael Elam, Heidrun H. Krämer, Karin Rylander, Johan Control,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (1), 90-103 Wessberg, and M. Catherine Bushnell (2008), “Unmyelinated Yadav, Manjit S., and Paul A. Pavlou (2014), “Marketing in tactile afferents have opposite effects on insular and computer-mediated envorironments: Research Synthesis and somatosensory cortical processing,” Neuroscience Letters, new directions,” Journal of Marketing, 78, 20–40. 436, 128–32. Parasuraman, Raja and Victor Riley (1977), “Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse,” Human Factors, 39(2), 230-253.