Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Should agentic conversational AI change how we think about ethics? Characterising an interactional ethics centred on respect

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2401.09082 v2 pith:IRR46PCU submitted 2024-01-17 cs.CL cs.AIcs.HC

Should agentic conversational AI change how we think about ethics? Characterising an interactional ethics centred on respect

classification cs.CL cs.AIcs.HC
keywords agenticethicsinteractionsocialagentscentredconversationalfactors
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

With the growing popularity of conversational agents based on large language models (LLMs), we need to ensure their behaviour is ethical and appropriate. Work in this area largely centres around the 'HHH' criteria: making outputs more helpful and honest, and avoiding harmful (biased, toxic, or inaccurate) statements. Whilst this semantic focus is useful when viewing LLM agents as mere mediums or output-generating systems, it fails to account for pragmatic factors that can make the same speech act seem more or less tactless or inconsiderate in different social situations. With the push towards agentic AI, wherein systems become increasingly proactive in chasing goals and performing actions in the world, considering the pragmatics of interaction becomes essential. We propose an interactional approach to ethics that is centred on relational and situational factors. We explore what it means for a system, as a social actor, to treat an individual respectfully in a (series of) interaction(s). Our work anticipates a set of largely unexplored risks at the level of situated social interaction, and offers practical suggestions to help agentic LLM technologies treat people well.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. AI Alignment and Fiduciary Obligation

    cs.CY 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0

    The paper derives AI alignment criteria from fiduciary duties developers owe to users of extended AI assistants.