New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

In the Future Robopets Won't Be Far-Fetched

An animal behaviorist ponders a future where some Spots are robots. Larry Greenemeier reports

 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The advent of smartphones, social media and other technologies have altered the way people interact with each other. Just watch a group of people out for a meal together, all on their phones texting people who aren’t there.

Technology may also be poised to change the way we relate to animals—by removing the living, breathing ones from our homes. The main threat to pets is not social media, per se, but rather robots and virtual FarmVille-like animals.

These inanimate objects of our affection are certainly easier to care for than are the real ones. And they still might someday meet their owners’ needs for companionship, love, obedience and dependence. That’s according to University of Melbourne animal behavior researcher Jean-Loup Rault, writing in the journal Frontiers in Veterinary Science. [Jean-Loup Rault, Pets in the digital age: live, robot, or virtual?]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The infiltration of fake pets is already happening to a small degree. In Japan, some owners of Sony’s AIBO robotic dog even hold funerals when these devices are beyond repair.

Our concept of a pet gets shaped at an early age. Previous generations born and bred with dogs and cats might dismiss robopets as mere toys. But children of the digital age, raised on touchscreens and online games, might see things differently. One can imagine a future fake-dog owner breathlessly asking his vet technician: is Fido dead, or is it just his battery?

—Larry Greenemeier

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe