FodnessReviewsSaheb

1.Did the presentation clearly describe the aims of the research – empirical, conceptual, methodological, and practical?

Sort of – it appears that she is applying ANT to social robotics, but it wasn't really clear what she hoped to gain other than a knowledge of how robots and humans interact, which seems somewhat limited. The research questions that went into the relations between robots and humans seemed to be based off of an assumption that this is a good thing, rather than critically evaluating the ways in which robots are deployed in various situations, and being open to the possibility that it is a destructive process.

2.Did the presentation provide an overview of what we already know about the research subject, and then explain how the proposed research will create new knowledge?

Yes – there was a detailed background slide that went over the current state of robotics and how they are being deployed in social situations.

3.Did the presentation provide a robust sense of how the research will be carried out, and of the type of data that will be collected?

There was a slide that detailed the interviews to be carried out and the field sites.

4.Did the research plan presented seem credible and feasible?

I didn't get a good sense of why the specific sites were chosen, which may have something to do with the fact that the aims of the research weren't entirely clear. In fact, it seems that the research should be done at the intersection of robots and humans, which won't necessarily happen at the laboratories that are developing the robots. I think it would be significantly more interesting to observe robots being deployed in a mental institution as opposed to the preliminary tests in a laboratory, for example. Perhaps this isn't possible given the current state of the technology, though.

5.Did the presentation provide a tangible sense of the book and other outcomes of the research?

Yes.

6.Did the presentation persuade you that the proposed research is important, in this historical moment in particular?

Yes – the problems associated with schizophrenia are high, and it is not “curable.” However, not necessarily why this moment in particular – perhaps because there is an increase in the capabilities of new humanoid robots?

7.Was the speaking style clear, engaging, and well timed?

Primarily, yes. There wasn't really a need to go over all of the research sub-questions, though, especially if it required speed-reading all of them.

8.Further comments and questions:

This project still seems to be loosely defined.