The Emotional Alignment Design Policy

Abstract We articulate and defend the Emotional Alignment Design Policy , according to which artificial entities should be designed to elicit emotional reactions from users that appropriately reflect the entities’ capacities and moral status, or lack thereof. This principle can be violated in two ways: by designing an artificial system that elicits stronger or weaker emotional reactions than its capacities and moral status warrant (overshooting or undershooting), or by designing a system that elicits the wrong type of emotional reaction (hitting the wrong target). Although the Emotional Alignment Design Policy is presumably attractive, practical implementation faces several challenges, including: how to respect user autonomy while promoting appropriate responses; navigating expert and public disagreement and uncertainty about facts and values; what to do if emotional alignment seems to require creating or destroying entities with moral status; and the extent to which designs should conform to, versus attempt to alter, user assumptions and attitudes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Topoi
Published
2026-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-025-10363-5
Primary Topic
Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Emotional Alignment Design Policy

Jeff Sebo, Eric Schwitzgebel
Topoi
Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
article

The Emotional Alignment Design Policy

Jeff Sebo, Eric Schwitzgebel
article en

Abstract

Abstract We articulate and defend the Emotional Alignment Design Policy , according to which artificial entities should be designed to elicit emotional reactions from users that appropriately reflect the entities’ capacities and moral status, or lack thereof. This principle can be violated in two ways: by designing an artificial system that elicits stronger or weaker emotional reactions than its capacities and moral status warrant (overshooting or undershooting), or by designing a system that elicits the wrong type of emotional reaction (hitting the wrong target). Although the Emotional Alignment Design Policy is presumably attractive, practical implementation faces several challenges, including: how to respect user autonomy while promoting appropriate responses; navigating expert and public disagreement and uncertainty about facts and values; what to do if emotional alignment seems to require creating or destroying entities with moral status; and the extent to which designs should conform to, versus attempt to alter, user assumptions and attitudes.

Topoi
University of California, Riverside (US), New York University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The Emotional Alignment Design Policy — Jeff Sebo, Eric Schwitzgebel · Topoi (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS