Young children's understanding of animacy and entertainment robots

被引:46
作者
Okita, Sandra Y.
Schwartz, Daniel L.
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Cognit & Technol Lab, Psychol Studies Educ, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Sch Educ, Psychol Studies Educ, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Stanford Univ, Sch Educ, Learning Sci Technol & Design, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
young children; human-robot interaction; robotic pets; social responses to technology; cognitive psychology; conceptual development; naive theories;
D O I
10.1142/S0219843606000795
中图分类号
TP24 [机器人技术];
学科分类号
080202 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Complex interactions, biologically-inspired features and intelligence are increasingly seen in entertainment robots. Do these features affect how children interpret robots? Children have "animistic intuitions" that they use to attribute intelligence, biology, and agency to living things. Two studies explore whether young children also apply animistic intuitions to robotic animals, and whether attributes vary by the child's age, robot behavior and appearance. A total of ninety-three three- to five-year-olds participated in two experiments. They observed or interacted with robots that exhibited different behaviors and levels of responsiveness to their environment. They then answered simple questions that probed their attributions of biology, intelligence, and agency. The results indicated that regardless of the robots' look and behavior, younger children over-generalized their animistic intuitions about real animals and older children attributed some animistic qualities but not others. One implication is that young children's criteria and attributions do not depend on robot features that are important for older children and adults. Another implication is that children do not have a theory of aliveness, and they develop the category of robot slowly and piecemeal as they learn discrete facts about how technology differs from living things.
引用
收藏
页码:393 / 412
页数:20
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
Bar-Cohen, 2003, BIOL INSPIRED INTELL
[2]  
Bartneck C., 2004, EXT ABSTR CHI, P1731
[3]  
Carey S., 1985, CONCEPTUAL CHANGE CH
[4]  
diSessa A.A., 1988, Constructivism in the Computer Age, P49, DOI DOI 10.1159/000342945
[5]  
FERNIE D, 1988, ERIC DIGEST, P2
[6]   THE PERCEPTION OF BIOLOGICAL MOTION BY HUMAN INFANTS [J].
FOX, R ;
MCDANIEL, C .
SCIENCE, 1982, 218 (4571) :486-487
[7]   HUMAN AGENCY AND RESPONSIBLE COMPUTING - IMPLICATIONS FOR COMPUTER-SYSTEM DESIGN [J].
FRIEDMAN, B ;
KAHN, PH .
JOURNAL OF SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE, 1992, 17 (01) :7-14
[8]   Children's causal explanations of animate and inanimate motion [J].
Gelman, SA ;
Gottfried, GM .
CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1996, 67 (05) :1970-1987
[9]  
Gopnik A., 1997, WORDS THOUGHTS THEOR
[10]  
Inagaki K., 2002, Young children's naive thinking about the biological world