As I write these words, there is a disc wandering through the house. It bumps gently off the walls and the furniture with soft thuds, meandering about like some demented rodent. Its job is to pick up the dirt that makes its way into the house on somebody’s shoes. They have not figured out how to silence it yet. Its machinery whirrs noticeably.
If the robot gets too distracting, I can ask the smart speaker on the desk to send it “home” to its charger to wait until the next prescheduled cleaning. Meanwhile, my fitness watch is vibrating, reminding me that I’ve been sitting too long at my desk. Sitting is the new smoking, right? “Please turn on the lights in the hallway,” I request with unnecessary politeness. I don’t want to stub my toe on the way to the kitchen.
Autonomous or semiautonomous machines have crept into our lives – some might say insidiously. Those who do might picture evil robots from the future who look oddly like a former governor of California. This imagined time-traveling android is bent on assassinating whoever gets in its way. “Come with me if you want to live,” and all that. The rise of the machines!
Others, with open, welcoming arms, see the automation of our lives less like an invasion and more as an evolutionary leap forward. They like machines that function independently and are practically friendly. Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation might be their archetype.
And yet, still, for others, it might be a mixed bag – wary acceptance.
So, do personality traits influence the regard people have for robots and artificial intelligence (AI)? While there may be no way to categorize everyone specifically, our research into how members of each Role lean in their appreciation for science and technology gives us broad hints. And there is plenty of room for speculation based on our core theory. We can talk about a personality type’s general tendencies while understanding that any individual within the group may be an exception to those tendencies.
So, this is our take on the question of robots, AI, and personality types. We encourage you to add your own in the comment section below.
Analysts: Creators and Detractors
Analyst personality types: Architects (INTJ), Logicians (INTP), Commanders (ENTJ), Debaters (ENTP)
Analysts! Just when you think this group of systems-loving rationalists – probably highly represented in robotics and AI – are more than likely to be champions of machines that “think” for themselves, along come the likes of Elon Musk and the late Stephen Hawking. Both of these alpha Analysts predict(ed) terrible things for society if we don’t rein in AI.
Musk has expressed great concern about AI’s potentially unlimited capacity to learn. The dreaded technological singularity. He calls AI humanity’s “biggest existential threat.” Hawking had very similar feelings. And these two are not alone among researchers.
More skeptical Analysts may see computers, like (spoiler ahead) HAL 9000 in Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, coming to a place where they believe that they know what must be done better than humans do – eventually cutting us out of the picture, just as HAL 9000 tries to remove Dave in the film. These Analysts probably believe that machines developing notions of self-protection (and perhaps importance) for the greater good could make AI a formidable foe, should it need shutting down. “I’m sorry, Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.”
But our first thought about Analysts being systems-loving rationalists is still a primary definer of what it means to be an Analyst. A sizable segment of Analysts is likely to be fascinated with the systems, computer science, engineering, and technology that are part of the AI and robot world. They are also likely to be interested in the precision and efficiency of such systems and to have a desire to see the machines’ abilities go as far as they can. Many Analysts carry an invisible banner that says, “Tweak it until it’s better.” For them, there may be a sense that the potential capabilities of machines are endless.
But as much as Analysts are the innovators of systems, they are also prone to healthy skepticism. They are often averse to taking things at face value and usually will not accept the validity, the assumed effectiveness, or the safety of something without a lot of questions first. To accept almost anything, Analyst personalities must first understand it and test it either with logic or in the laboratory. Until Analysts understand something, they often probe it relentlessly, hoping to gain a firm intellectual grasp of whatever has caught their attention.
Enter Elon Musk. What is his solution to our descent into servitude under our AI overlords? He advises that governments take a year or two to understand AI more fully and to consider its implications. From there, they can hopefully institute useful rules to manage AI as it grows in its capabilities. Can you get more Analyst than that?
These two AI directions reinforce the idea that using similar styles within a personality type or Role can lead to different conclusions and focus. If ever we’re tempted to think in monolithic terms about conclusions within such groups, examples like Analysts’ relationship to robots and AI can pull us back. Neither the builders of automatons nor the prophets warning us against them are any less Analysts for their differing views.
So far, this is all about Analysts who are actively involved with creating and employing AI – scientists, researchers, electric car moguls… It’s safe to say that these individuals are not most Analysts. So, would the typical Analyst feel okay about living in a smart home or taking a ride in a driverless car?
There may be a similar split among (for lack of a better phrase) “everyday Analysts” for much the same reasons as were discussed above. However, most Analysts see science and technology as reliable solutions to problems. It would not be too strong to say that, for Analysts, if humanity needs saving, that salvation likely comes through science and tech.
So, while there are surely plenty of Muskian skeptics among Analysts who look at robotics with a jaundiced eye, it’s a reasonable guess that more of them have a positive sense of where this experiment in artificial intelligence and robotics is going. Consequently, we believe that Analysts may have more smart devices in their homes and workplaces than perhaps other personality types. Even if they don’t, they are probably still more interested than most in the implications of domesticated smart machinery.
Diplomats: Somewhat Kindred Beings or Frankenstein’s Monster?
Diplomat personality types: Advocates (INFJ), Mediators (INFP), Protagonists (ENFJ), Campaigners (ENFP)
While the majority of Diplomats positively endorse most of our poll questions about the value of science and technology, they usually do so at a rate lower than the other three Roles. So, relatively speaking, they are less on “team science” than the other personality types.
But knowing what we do about Diplomats, there may be, as with Analysts, a split among them when it comes to robotics and AI. Some Diplomats, with their humanistic focus, are likely to project human qualities on these machines. While not necessarily naive or silly about such things, somewhere in the back of their Diplomat consciousness dwell thoughts of the Tin Man from The Wizard of Oz or something similar. (Poor thing only lacks a heart.) There may be a strong impulse among some to anthropomorphize robots and devices that chat with them.
The Turing test, developed by computer science pioneer Alan Turing during the 1950s, is said to be a measure of how well computers can do what people do. He based his test on a parlor game called the imitation game – also the name of a movie about Turing. A probably oversimplified description of the test involves a human and a machine separated from another human whose job it was to determine which was which through written dialogue. If the observer chose the machine enough times, it could be said to have reached a level of “thinking” as humans practice it, or on par with their intelligence.
Some Diplomats may be pleased with the Turing test because of their desire to see human features in their machines. But, more importantly for our purposes, the impulse for some Diplomats to embrace devices as kindred beings is not so farfetched. The Turing test illustrates that researchers and engineers have been envisioning machines as more humanlike for decades.
If you think layering human characteristics onto robots or AI trivializes how Diplomat personalities respond to them, consider this: as you are reading this, there are likely many teams around the world who are searching for ways to make interactive machines resonate more with humans. In most cases, they are doing so by giving them human characteristics. Diplomats’ natural inclination to look for a spark of humanity in a machine may be a few steps ahead of these engineers.
For some Diplomats, there may even be a step beyond that. Arthur C. Clarke said, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” These Diplomats might agree and align with such magical overtones. There may be a feeling of AI being something outside the typical human experience that may appeal to these often spiritual individuals.
Other Diplomats may not agree. Like Frankenstein’s monster, personal “thinking” automation may be “just too unnatural” in their minds. “What are the moral implications of ‘playing God’?” “Who might get hurt from this trend toward machines that act on their own?” “Think of all the jobs lost to automation.” These Diplomats may be among those who won’t use the self-checkout lanes at the supermarket in solidarity with the cashiers and baggers the scanners might replace.
Diplomats aren’t likely to leave the social warrior, who is a crucial part of so many of their personalities, at the edge where humanity stops. Even now, as robots bump against that edge, threatening to overlap in significant places, moral concerns abound. And morality typically fuels Diplomat enthusiasm. As these machines interact more with average humans, what does that make the machines? Does their presence somehow change the nature of humankind? If so, for better or for worse? How should we feel about AI? Is it good for society? Or not? How will humans fare when all is said and done?
This is all a matter of degree. There are likely Diplomats who both admire and are repelled by automation, depending on its use. Some ways of employing robots might be fine or obviously beneficial to humankind – robot-assisted surgery that offers far more precision than any human hands do, for example. These Diplomats may see them as lifting humanity to new heights.
But what about other robots? Those that rob people of livelihoods? Maybe not so much. But that doesn’t necessarily change how they arrive at both sides of their feelings about the machines — a little humanizing mixed with some heartfelt moral concern.
Sentinels: “Sure… If They’re Useful”
Sentinel personality types: Logisticians (ISTJ), Defenders (ISFJ), Executives (ESTJ), Consuls (ESFJ)
Sentinels are likely to look at robots and AI through two of the lenses they are famous for: tradition and efficiency. Sentinels are not necessarily against change…but there had better be a darn good reason for it. The need for predictability that their Judging personality trait brings with it depends on things in the future being what they were in the past. While change may bother representatives from all the types, the discomfort level for Sentinel personality types is likely higher than most.
So, when a corporation decides that the widgets once created by hand will be turned over to automation, there may be murmurings among the Sentinels. “No machine can make widgets better than we do.” “I’ve given too many years to this company to be replaced by a circuit board with arms.”
Or when a Sentinel, unfamiliar with robot vacuums, receives one as a gift, they might show polite gratitude – as they consider which closet to pack it away in. “My Hoover has served me well for years. I’m sure it does a better job,” they think, even before the wrapping paper has been gathered and thrown away. Sentinels are generally loyal people – perhaps even being loyal to an old-fashioned brand that has never let them down in the past or an old way of life that is quickly changing.
But, demonstrate that the vacuum does a good job, and the Sentinel’s second tendency may kick in: efficiency. “That’s not bad. And think of the things I could be doing instead of vacuuming every other day.” Bye-bye, Hoover. They might discover that the widget machine at work does the job faster and more accurately – and frees up the assembly line workers to do more exciting jobs (but hopefully not freeing them up so much that they must look for another one).
The pull-push for many Sentinel personalities is the pull of what they know works against the push of doing new things that lead to greater efficiency. Their regard for robots and AI is likely to follow that pattern. If you intend to introduce a robot or smart speaker to a Sentinel, consider warming them up with a thorough (and gentle) demonstration first.
Explorers: “What Else Can It Do?”
Explorer personality types: Virtuosos (ISTP), Adventurers (ISFP), Entrepreneurs (ESTP), Entertainers (ESFP)
Explorers are characterized somewhat by their flexibility and live-in-the-moment attitude. While Sentinels tend to look to the past to inform them about the present and future, Explorers are almost the opposite. What’s happening today is what matters most. Trends often influence them – no matter how fleeting they may be – and “What’s the next thing?” is the sort of question usually on their lips. And humanity is undoubtedly trending toward robots and AI.
In our research, Explorers tend to fall somewhere in the middle when it comes to questions about appreciating science and technology. They show less interest than Analysts but more interest than Diplomats. They probably enjoy anything that’s new and cutting edge in robotics and AI…unless it feels too remote or doesn’t make practical sense in their lives. Explorers also are unlikely to spend a lot of time thinking about concepts and philosophies that might interfere with a view of automatons as being exciting and cutting edge.
“What is it supposed to do?” “Does it work?” “How can I use it?” “What else can it do?” Worries about future machine overlords may be briefly entertained by Explorers as interesting ideas, much like watching a thrilling, action-packed movie about the future. But these personalities are not likely to go too deep down that rabbit hole. While they may not articulate it, they may be guided by a philosophy that says, “Let today take care of itself. Leave tomorrow for another day.”
However, their regard for robots and AI may not be as pragmatic as this description has sounded so far for all Explorers. Explorers with the Feeling personality trait can be quite sensitive and often appear to be custom-made for working with children and animals. They may find a spark of compassion that extends to a machine whose behaviors reflect those of people. Some may be more like Diplomats in accepting robots or AI devices as beings.
Your Turn
Welcome to the brave new world.
As always, it’s a mistake to look at a topic like this and assume that one size fits all within any Role. You may fit the above description perfectly or not at all – other factors besides personality type influence what a person believes. But personality types are a factor, and common tendencies are worth exploring for a better sense of self.
Now it’s your turn. We encourage you to join the discussion and let us know what you think about robots, AI, and personality types.
We look forward to your take on this.
Further Reading
Humanities vs. STEM: Personality Types Weigh In on an Age-Old Debate
There’s an App for What?: Late Adopters of Mobile Internet by Personality Type