APPEL, M., KRAUSE, S., GLEICH, U., MARA, M. (2016). Meaning through fiction: Science fiction and innovative technologies. In: «Psychology of Aesthetic, Creativity, and Arts», vol. X, n. 4, pp. 472-480.

APPEL, M., MARKER, C., MARA, M. (2019). Otakuism and the appeal of sex robots. In: «Frontiers in Psychology», vol. X, Art.Nr. 569 - doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00569.

BALISTRERI, M. (2021). Sex robots. In: F. FOSSA, G. TAMBURRINI, V. SCHIAFFONATI, (a cura di), Automi e persone. Introduzione all’etica dell’Intelligenza Artificiale e della robotica, Carocci, Roma, pp. 195-212.

BALISTRERI, M. (2022). Il bambino migliore? Cosa significa essere genitori responsabili al tempo del genome editing, Fangango Roma.

BALISTRERI, M. (2022). Sex robots. Love in the age of machines, Trivent, Budapest.

BALISTRERI, M., CASILE, F. (2020). Care robots: From tools of care to training opportunities. Moral considerations. In: E. POPESCU, A.B. GIL, L. LANCIA, L.S. SICA, A. MAVROUDI (eds.), Methodologies and intelligent system for technology enhanced learning, 9th International Conference, Workshops, Springer, Cham, pp. 18-25.

BALISTRERI, M., UMBRELLO, S. (2022). Should the colonisation of space be based on reproduction? Critical considerations on the choice of having a child in space. In: «Journal of Responsible Technology», vol. XI, Art.Nr. 100040 – doi: 10.1016/j.jrt.2022.100040.

BALISTRERI, M., UMBRELLO, S. (2022). Space travel does not constitute a condition of moral exceptionality. That which obtains in space obtains also on Earth!. In: «Medicina e Morale», vol. LXXI, n. 3, pp. 311-321.

BALISTRERI, M., UMBRELLO, S. (2022). The ethics of space travelling and extraterrestrial colonization. What is moral in space is also moral on Earth. In: «Ragion Pratica», in corso di stampa.

BARNES, E. (2014). Valuing disability, causing disability. In: «Ethics», vol. CXXV, n. 1, pp. 88-113.

BARNES, E. (2016). The minority body: A theory of disability, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

BISCONTI, P. (2021). Will sexual robots modify human relationships? A psychological approach to reframe the symbolic argument. In: «Advanced Robotics», vol. XXXV, n. 9, pp. 561-571.

BLACKFORD, R. (2011). Robots and reality: A reply to Robert Sparrow. In: «Ethics and Information Technology», vol. XIV, n. 1, pp. 41-51.

BRANDON, M., PLANKE, J.A. (2021). Emotional, sexual and behavioral correlates of attitudes toward sex robots: Results of an online survey. In: «Journal of Future Robot Life», vol. II, n. 1-2, pp. 67-82.

BRANDON, M., SHLYKOVA, N., MORGENTALER, A. (2022). Curiosity and other attitudes towards sex robots: Results of an online survey. In: «Journal of Future Robot Life», vol. III, n. 1, pp. 3-16.

BUSS, D.M., LARSEN, R.J., WESTEN, D., SEMMELROTH, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. In: «Psychological Science», vol. III, n. 4, pp. 251-256.

CAPPUCCIO, M.L., PEETERS, A., MCDONALD, W. (2019). Sympathy for Dolores: Moral consideration for robots based on virtue and recognition. In: «Philosophy and Technology», vol. XXXIII, n. 1, pp. 9-31.

CHEOK, A.D., LEVY, D., KARUNANAYAKA, K. (2016). Lovotics: Love and sex with robots. In: K. KARPOUZIS, G. YANNAKAKIS (eds.), Emotion in games, Springer, Cham, pp. 303-328.

COECKELBERGH, M. (2018). Why care about robots? Empathy, moral standing, and the language of suffering. In: «Kairos», vol. XX, n. 1, pp. 141-158.

CULLEN, D.C., HUDNALL, M.C., ALI, S., BEHRAM, S.S., EDELBROECK, E., LAYENDECKER, A., MARQUES, R.E., MUSHTAQ, S., VERMEULEN, A.C.J. (2023). Sex in space: Consideration of uncontrolled human conception in emerging space tourism, Green paper for community consultation (v1a_24-Apr-2023_DCC_published).

DAMIANI, S. (2016). Giocare con le cose morte. Reborn dolls, arte ed empatia. In: «Piano B. Arti e Culture Visive», vol. I, n. 2, pp. 30-53.

DANAHER, J. (2017). Should we be thinking about sex robots?, In: J. DANAHER, N. MCARTHUR (eds.), Robot sex: Social implications and ethical, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp. 3-14.

DANAHER, J. (2018). Why we should create artificial offspring: Meaning and the collective afterlife. In: «Science and Engineering Ethics», vol. XXIV, pp. 1097-1118.

DANAHER, J. (2020). Welcoming robots into the moral circle: A defence of ethical behaviourism. In: «Science and Engineering Ethics», vol. XXVI, pp. 2023-2049.

DE VRIES, J.G., FORGER, N.G. (2015). Sex differences in the brain: A whole body perspective. In: «Biology of Sex Differences», vol. XV, n. 6, Art.Nr. 32 - doi: 10.1186/s13293-015-0032-z.

DÖRING, N., PÖSCHL, S. (2018). Sex toys, sex dolls, sex robots: Our under-researched bedfellows. In: «Sexologies», vol. XXVII, n. 3, pp. 51-55.

DUBÉ, S., ANCTIL, D. (2021). Erobots and erobotics. In: A.D. Lykins (ed.), Encyclopedia of sexuality and gender, Springer, Cham - doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-59531-3_100-1.

DUBÉ, S., ANCTIL, D. (2021). Foundations of erobotics. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIII, n. 6, pp. 1205-1233.

DUBÉ, S., SANTAGUIDA, M., ANCTIL, D., GIACCARI, L., LAPIERRE, J. (2023). The case for space sexology. In: «The Journal of Sex Research», vol. LX, n. 2, pp. 165-176.

DUMOUCHEL, P., DAMIANO, L. (2017). Living with robots, Harvard University Press, Harvard.

FOSCH-VILLARONGA, E., POULSEN, A. (2020). Exploring the potential use of sexual robot technologies for disabled and elder care. In: «Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics», vol. XI, pp. 1-18.

FREUD, S. (1989). Il perturbante (1919). In: S. FREUD, Opere, vol. IX, a cura di C.L. MUSATTI, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino, pp. 81-114.

GARASIC, M. (2013). Anti-love biotechnology: Was it not better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. In: «The American Journal of Bioethics», vol. XIII, n. 11, pp. 22-23.

GARASIC, M. (2021). The war of ethical worlds: Why an acceptance of posthumanism on Mars does not imply a follow up on Earth. In: «Medicina e Morale», vol. LXX, n. 3, pp. 317-327.

GARASIC, M. (2022). What happens on Mars, stays on Mars: A reply to Balistreri and Umbrello. In: «Medicina e Morale», vol. LXXI, n. 3, pp. 323-332.

GARLAND-THOMSON, R. (2012). The case for conserving disability. In: «Journal of Bioethical Inquiry», vol. IX, n. 3, pp. 339-355.

GLOVER, J. (2006). Choosing children: Genes, disability and design, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

GUNKEL, D.J. (2019). Robot rights, MIT Press, Cambridge (CA).

JECKER, N. (2021). Nothing to be ashamed of: Sex robots for older adults with disabilities. In: «British Journal of Medical Ethics», vol. XLVII, n. 1, pp. 26-32.

JENNINGS, R.T., BAKER, E.S. (2008). Gynecologic and reproductive concerns. In: M.R. BARRATT, S.L. POOL (eds.). Principles of clinical medicine for space flight, Springer, New York, pp. 381-390.

KNOTT, A., SAGAR, M., TAKAC, M. (2022). The ethics of interaction with neurorobotic agents: A case study with BabyX. In: «AI and Ethics», vol. II, n. 4, pp. 115-128.

KOVEROLA, M., DROSINOU, M., PALOMÄKI, J., HALONEN, J., KUNNARI, A., REPO, M., LEHTONEN, N., LAAKASUO, M. (2020). Moral psychology of sex robots: An experimental study – How pathogen disgust is associated with interhuman sex but not interandroid sex. In: «Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics», vol. XI, n. 1, pp. 233-249.

LEI, X., CAO, Y., MA, B., ZHANG, Y., NING, L., QIAN, J., ZHANG, L., QU, Y., ZHANG, T., LI, D., CHEN, Q., SHI, J., ZHANG, X., MA, C., ZHANG, Y., DUAN, E. (2020). Development of mouse preimplantation embryos in space. In: «National Science Review», vol. VII, n. 9, pp. 1437-1446.

LEVY, D. (2007). Love and sex with robots: The evolution of human-robot relationships, Harper & Collins, New York.

LEVY, D. (2013). Roxxxy the “Sex Robot” - Real or fake?. In: «Lovotics», vol. I - doi:10.4303/lt/235685

LIBERATI, N. (2017). Teledildonics and new ways of “being in touch”: A phenomenological analysis of the use of haptic devices for intimate relations. In: «Science and Engineering Ethics», vol. XXIII, n. 3, pp. 801-823.

LIN, P., ABNEY, K. (2014). Introduction to astronaut bioethics. In: «Slate», 6 ottobre, https://slate.com/techno logy/2014/10/astronaut-bioethics-would-it-be-unethical-to-give-birth-on-mars.html

MA, B., CHAO, Y.-J., ZHENG, W.-B., LU, J.-R., KUANG., H., LEI, X.-H., LV, Y.-H., ZHANG, T., DUAN, E.-K. (2008). Real-time micrography of mouse preimplantation embryos in an orbit module on SJ-8 satellite. In: «Microgravity Science and Technology», vol. XX, pp. 127-136.

MA, J., TOJIB, D., TSARENKO, Y. (2022). Sex robots: Are we ready for them? An exploration of the psychological mechanisms underlying people’s receptiveness of sex robots. In: «Journal of Business Ethics», vol. CLXXVIII, n. 4, pp. 1-17.

MAAS M.K., VASILENKO S.A., WILLOUGHBY B.J. (2018). A dyadic approach to pornography use and relationship satisfaction among heterosexual couples: The role of pornography acceptance and anxious attachment. In: «Journal of Sex Research», vol. LV, n. 6, pp. 772-782.

MACDORMAN, K. (2015). Androids as an experimental apparatus: Why is there an uncanny valley and can we exploit it?. In: Cogsci-2005 Workshop: Toward social mechanisms of android science, Stresa, pp. 106-118.

MAGNI, S.F. (2021). In defence of person-affecting procreative beneficence. In: «Bioethics», vol. XXXV, n. 5, pp. 473-479.

MARA, M., APPEL, M. (2015). Science fiction reduces the eeriness of android robots: A field experiment. In: «Computers in Human Behavior», vol. XLVIII, pp. 156-162.

MASSA, N., BISCONTI, P., NARDI, D. (2022). The psychological implications of companion robots: A theoretical framework and an experimental setup. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», online first: January, 28th 2022 - doi: 10.1007/s12369-021-00846-x.

MCARTHUR, N. (2017). The case for sexbots. In: J. DANAHER, N. MCARTHUR (eds.). Robot sex. Social and ethical implications, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp. 31-45.

MORI, M. (1970). Bukimi no tani [the Uncanny Valley]. In: «Energy», vol. VII, n. 4, pp. 33-35.

NOMURA, T., KANDA, T., SUZUKI, T. (2006). Experimental investigation into influence of negative attitudes toward robots on human-robot interaction. In: «AI and Society», vol. XX, n. 2, pp. 138-150.

NORDMO, M., NǼSS, J.O., HUSØY, M.F. (2020). Friends, lovers or nothing: Men and women differ in their perceptions of sex robots and platonic love robots. In: «Frontiers in Psychology», vol. XI, Art.Nr. 355 - doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00355.

OLEKSY, T., WNUK, A. (2021). Do women perceive sex robots as threatening? The role of political views and presenting the robot as a female- vs male-friendly product. In: «Computers in Human Behavior», vol. CXVII, Art.Nr. 106664 – doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106664.

OWANO, N. (2016). Microgravity research satellite explores embryo development in space – URL: https://phys.org/news/2016-04-microgravity-satellite-explores-embryo-space.html

PARFIT, D. (1989). Ragioni e persone (1984), traduzione italiana di R. RINI, Il Saggiatore, Milano.

PEETERS, A., HASELAGER, P. (2021). Designing virtuous sex robots. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIII, n. 4, pp. 55-66.

REGNERUS M., GORDON D., PRICE J. (2016). Documenting pornography use in America: A comparative analysis of methodological approaches. In: «Journal of Sex Research», vol. LIII, n. 7, pp. 873-881.

RICHARD A., ROHRMANN S., VANDELEUR C.L., SCHMID M., BARTH J., EICHHOLZER M. (2017). Loneliness is adversely associated with physical and mental health and lifestyle factors: Results from a Swiss national survey. In: «PLoS ONE», vol. XII, n. 7, Art.Nr. e0181442 - doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181442.

RICHARDSON, K. (2015). The asymmetrical “relationship”: Parallels between prostitution and the development of sex robots. In: «ACM SIGCAS Computer and Society», vol. XLV, n. 3, pp. 290-293.

RICHARDSON, K. (2016). Sex robot matters: Slavery, the prostituted, and the rights of machines. In: «IEEE Technology and Society Magazine», vol. XXXV, n. 2, pp. 46-53.

RICHARDSON, K. (2021). Realdoll – Disponibile online allo URL: https://www.realdoll.com/realdoll-x/

ROBERTS, M. (2022). The nonidentity problem. In: E.N. ZALTA, U. NODERLMAN (eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Winter edition - URL:https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/nonidentity-problem/.

RODOGNO, R. (2016). Social robots, fiction, and sentimentality. In: «Ethics and Information Technology», vol. XVIII, n. 4, pp. 257-268.

RONCA, A.E., BAKER, E.S., BAVENDAM, T.G., BECK, K.D., MILLER, V.M., TASH, J.S., JENKINS, M. (2014). Effects of sex and gender on adaptations to space: Reproductive health. In: «Journal of Women’s Health», vol. XXIII, n. 11, pp. 967-74

SAVULESCU, J. (2001). Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. In: «Bioethics», vol. XV, n. 5-6, pp. 413-426.

SAVULESCU, J., KAHANE, G. (2009). The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life. In: «Bioethics», vol. XXIII, n. 5, pp. 274-290.

SCHENKER, E., FORKHEIM, K. (1998). Mammalian mice embryo early development in weightlessness environment on STS 80 space flight. In: «Israel Aerospace Medicine Institute», Report 5.

SCHEUTZ, M., ARNOLD, T. (2016). Are we ready for sex robots?. In: «ACM – IEEE - International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction», pp. 351-358 – doi: 10.1109/HRI.2016.7451772.

SCHUSTER, H., PECK, S.L. (2016). Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kid: Ethical implications of pregnancy on missions to colonize other planets. In: «Life Science, Society and Policy», vol. XII, n. 1, Art.Nr. 10 - doi: 10.1186/s40504-016-0043-5.

SKAŁACKA, K., GERYMSKI, R. (2019). Sexual activity and life satisfaction in older adults. In: «Psychogeriatrics», vol. XIX, n. 3, pp. 195-201.

SPARROW, R. (2002). The march of the robot dogs. In: «Ethics and Information Technology», vol. IV, n. 4, pp. 305-318.

SPARROW, R. (2017). Robots, rape, and representation. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. IX, n. 4, pp. 465-477.

SPARROW, R. (2020). Virtue and vice in our relationships with robots: Is there an asymmetry and how might it be explained?. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIII, pp. 23-29.

SPARROW, R. (2021). Sex robot fantasies. In: «Journal of Medical Ethics», vol. XLVII, n. 1, pp. 33-34.

STRIKWERDA, L. (2017). Legal and moral implications of child sex robots. In: J. DANAHER, N. MCARTHUR (eds.), Robot sex. Social and ethical implications, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp. 133-151.

SULLINS, J. (2012). Robots, love, and sex: The ethics of building a love machine. In: «IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing», vol. III, n. 4, pp. 398-409.

SUZUKI, Y., GALLI, L., IKEDA, A., ITAKURA, S., KITAZAKI, M. (2015). Measuring empathy for human and robot hand pain using electroencephalography. In: «Scientific Reports», vol. V, Art.Nr. 15924 - doi: 10.1038/srep15924.

SZCZUKA, J.M., KRÄMER, N.C. (2018). Jealousy 4.0? An empirical study on jealousy-related discomfort of women evoked by other women and gynoid robots. In: «Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics», vol. IX, n. 1, pp. 323-336.

SZOCIK, K. (2020). Is human enhancement in space a moral duty? Missions to Mars, advanced AI and genome editing in space. In: «Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics», vol. XXIX, n. 1, pp. 122-130.

SZOCIK, K (2023). The bioethics of space exploration, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

SZOCIK, K. (2023). The ethical status of germline gene editing in future space missions: The special case of positive selection on Earth for future space missions. In: «NanoEthics», vol. XVII, n. 1, Art.Nr. 3 - doi: 10.1007/s11569-023-00438-1.

SZOCIK, K., WÓJTOWICZ, T. (2019). Human enhancement in space missions: From moral controversy to technological duty. In: «Technology in Society», vol. LIX, n. 18, Art.Nr. 101156 - doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101156.

THOMPSON, K. (2012). Fake babies: The women devoting themselves to eerily lifelike dolls. In: «The Mirror», URL: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/the-fake-babies-crazemeet-the-women-786454.

TROIANO, G.M., WOOD, M., HARTEVELD, C. (2020). “And this, kids, is how I met your mother": Consumerist, mundane, and uncanny futures with sex robots. In: «Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems ACM», Paper 471 – doi: 10.1145/3313831.3376598.

UMBRELLO, S., BALISTRERI, M. (2023). Human enhancement and reproductive ethics on generation ship. In: «Argumenta», online first: June, 16th 2023 - doi: 10.14275/2465-2334/20230.umb.

WAKAYAMA, S., ITO, D., KAMADA, Y., SHIMATZU, T., SUZUKI, T., NAGAMATSU, A., ARAKI, R., ISHIKAWA, T., KAMIMURA, S., HIROSE, N., KAZAMA, K., YANG, LI, INOUE, R., KIKUCHI, Y., HAYASHI, E., EMURA, R., WATANABE, R., NAGATOMO, H., SUZUKI, H., YAMAMORI, T., TADA, N.M., OSADA, I., UMEHARA, M., SANO, H., KASAHARA, H., HIGASHIBATA, A., YANO, S., ABE, M., KISHIGAMI, S., KOHDA, T., OOGA, M., WAKAYAMA, T. (2021). Evaluating the long-term effect of space radiation on the reproductive normality of mammalian sperm preserved on the international space station. In: «Science Advances», vol. XI, n. 7, Art.Nr. eabg5554 - doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abg5554.

WATKINS, A. (2020). Sex in space: Our final reproductive frontier. In: «Physiology News Magazine», vol. CXVII – doi: 10.36866/pn.117.14.

YOUGOV (2017), 1 in 4 men would consider having sex with a robot, pubblicato il 27 settembre – URL: https://today.yougov.com/news/2017/10/02/1-4-men-would-consider-having-sex-robot/.

ZARA, G. (2018). La psicologia dei sexbot nel trattamento dei sex offender. In: M. BALISTRERI, Sex robot. L’amore al tempo delle macchine, Fandango, Roma, pp. 225-282.

ZARA, G., VEGGI, S., FARRINGTON, D.P. (2022). Sexbots as synthetic companions: Comparing attitudes of official sex offenders and non-offenders. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIV, pp. 479-498.