Privacy – Access
The users, or people selected by them, can have access to the data collected by the robot.
As robots become more present in everyday environments, they increasingly function as data collectors: they record, interpret, and sometimes transmit information about users and their surroundings. In Human-Robot Interaction, "access" refers to the question of who can view, retrieve, and share this collected data. This is not only a technical concern but a social one, since access decisions shape trust, perceived control, and the acceptability of robots in sensitive contexts such as homes, schools, and healthcare settings.
From the perspective of privacy as a broader value, access is closely linked to the user's right to be informed about what is being collected and to control how it is shared. It also includes the possibility for users, or selected third parties, to retrieve the data generated by the robot. Prior work highlights that controlled sharing can be beneficial when appropriately constrained. For example, data such as biometric or behavioral signals may be shared with a chosen physician when it serves a clear therapeutic purpose. At the same time, the context of use matters significantly: expectations of access differ between a domestic robot in a private home and a robot deployed in a public or institutional space. Across cases, transparency about who has access to data is consistently emphasised as a baseline requirement, especially when dealing with vulnerable users such as children or older adults.
Empirical studies across education and care settings show that questions of access quickly become practical and relational. In school environments, parents have expressed interest in using robot-collected data to better understand classroom experiences, for example through audio or video records that provide insight into daily school activities. At the same time, teachers tend to support parental access in principle but often stress the need for moderation, suggesting that data should be reviewed before being shared to ensure appropriateness and context. This reflects an implicit balancing act between openness and safeguarding interpretation. In healthcare contexts, there is also reported openness to allowing health professionals direct access to robot-collected data when it supports therapeutic goals, with relatively little resistance from participants. Together, these findings illustrate that access is rarely a binary issue; instead, it is negotiated depending on who is requesting the data, for what purpose, and under which safeguards.
Excerpts from the paper:
About the value "Privacy"
The value of privacy is the one encompassing the largest amount of topics as highlighted in both the scoping review and the focus groups. It includes – among others – the right to be informed, to access and share the data collected, and the issues related to being continuously under the watchful eye of a robot. The focus groups participants have also highlighted that this value is strongly related to where, how and in which context the robot is used. Using a robot at home is completely different from using it in a public space. The experts emphasised that privacy should be maintained even when users do not want others to know they are using the robot.
About "Access"
From the scoping review emerged the importance of ensuring that the user has access to the data collected by the robot. Additionally, it was noted that sharing recorded information with selected individuals can be beneficial, for instance, sharing biometric data with a chosen physician. The focus groups discussions emphasised that data protection is particularly crucial when dealing with vulnerable populations, such as children and the elderly. It is also vital to clearly disclose upfront who will have access to the collected data.