Please have a low bar for reaching out! I would also be grateful for any input on ways to improve my work, general direction, or profile — click here to leave anonymous feedback. Thanks! :)

About

I have a background in psychology and social science research, and I am currently working on research and field-building in digital minds (at Cambridge Digital Minds1 and PRISM2). I care about society being better prepared for the challenges posed by increasingly capable AI (including its effects on humans and other beings), and the question of whether (future) AI systems may deserve moral consideration.

I’m actively thinking about where/how I can have the most impact, and my current hypothesis is that digital minds/AI welfare work is where I’m best placed to contribute.3 I am yet to determine my comparative advantage or lock down a specific focus, but am actively testing my fit across a few areas in my current role, to figure this out.

Research interests: AI welfare, artificial sentience beliefs, AI personhood, moral circle expansion, AI societal impacts (and resilience), animal welfare, human-AI interaction, psychology of effective altruism, institutional decision-making, movement formation/strategy, etc.

I also created a personal research agenda to track ideas I would like to explore further (I will keep adding to it over time). If you are working on something similar and/or would like to collaborate on any of these ideas, please reach out! Also feel free to leave comments/feedback on the document.

Last updated: June 2026

What the public will think about digital minds matters enormously, and it’s far from obvious that their views will track what experts and philosophers conclude. For example, you can imagine scenarios where AI systems intuitively feel sentient to most people, even though experts believe they lack the relevant underlying mechanisms (or the reverse, which would be a huge moral catastrophe!).

Regardless of where the empirical evidence lands, this seems likely to become a major societal issue, and preparing early makes sense.
My intuition is that field-building is currently one of the most important aspects of the field to develop, especially given how nascent it is and how quickly it’s growing. It also seems very high-impact to work on at this moment, since those (responsibly) building the field now are likely to have a disproportionately large influence on its outcomes and trajectory.
I am very open to other ideas (or pushback on my current ones) about where I might be best placed to contribute or which cause areas matter most, if you have any!