The impact of bionic prostheses on users' self-perceptions: A qualitative study

• Published in: Acta psychologica Vol. 241; p. 104085
• Main Authors: Bretschneider, Maximilian, Meyer, Bertolt, Asbrock, Frank
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier B.V 01.11.2023; Elsevier
• Subjects: Bionics; Embodied digital technologies; Prosthetics; Qualitative research; Self- and other-perception; Social interaction; Stereotypes; Qualitative research; Embodied digital technologies; Bionics; Social interaction; Self- and other-perception; Stereotypes; Prosthetics
• ISSN: 0001-6918; 1873-6297
• DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104085

Bionic devices for reestablishing or augmenting users' capabilities (e.g., bionic prostheses or exoskeletons) are becoming increasingly common. While prior research examined how such devices affect others' perceptions of their users, little is known about how these devices affect users' self-image and -perception, and the corresponding theory is scarce. To account for this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with users of bionic upper limb prostheses to obtain insights into their self- and meta-perceptions. Results of our qualitative analysis indicate that using bionic prostheses influences the social (self-) perception of bionics users in multiple ways, such that users describe themselves as being seen as more competent by others and treated differently after receiving the bionic prosthesis in comparison to simpler models. Results imply a somewhat complex dual identity among users in the sense that the bionic device instills competence, but disability-related feelings of stigma are present simultaneously. Despite being exploratory, our findings thus indicate that using bionic devices affects users' self-perception, stereotypes, and interpersonal perceptions. The ongoing proliferation of restoring devices and the introduction of augmenting technologies in future work contexts, for example, might thus have unintended social consequences that need to be accounted for. •Bionic prostheses affect self-perception, stereotypes, and social perception.•Bionic users receive more positive feedback than using low-tech/none prosthesis.•Users report increased competence and self-efficacy.•Because stereotyping still persists; users must cope with a dual identity.•Augmenting devices in future (work) settings require an analysis of their impact.