Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter?
Prior work has yielded contradicting evidence regarding the age at which children consistently and correctly categorize things as living or non-living. The present study tested children’s animacy judgments about robots with a Naïve Biology task. In the Naïve Biology task, 3- and 5-year-olds were ask...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023-02-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Psychology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1102370/full |
| _version_ | 1811170644582203392 |
|---|---|
| author | Elizabeth J. Goldman Anna-Elisabeth Baumann Diane Poulin-Dubois |
| author_facet | Elizabeth J. Goldman Anna-Elisabeth Baumann Diane Poulin-Dubois |
| author_sort | Elizabeth J. Goldman |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Prior work has yielded contradicting evidence regarding the age at which children consistently and correctly categorize things as living or non-living. The present study tested children’s animacy judgments about robots with a Naïve Biology task. In the Naïve Biology task, 3- and 5-year-olds were asked if robots, animals, or artifacts possessed mechanical or biological internal parts. To gauge how much children anthropomorphize robots in comparison to animals and artifacts, children also responded to a set of interview questions. To examine the role of morphology, two robots were used: a humanoid robot (Nao) and a non-humanoid robot (Dash). To investigate the role of dynamic characteristics, children saw one robot behave in a goal-directed manner (i.e., moving towards a ball) and one robot exhibit non-goal-directed behavior (i.e., moving away from a ball). Children of both age groups correctly attributed biological insides to the animal and mechanical insides to the artifact. However, 3-year-olds seemed confused about what belonged inside both robots and assigned biological and mechanical insides equally. In contrast, 5-year-olds correctly assigned mechanical insides to both robots, regardless of the robot’s morphology or goal-directedness. Regarding the Animacy Interview, 3-year-olds performed at chance level when asked about the animacy of robots, animals, and artifacts. In contrast, 5-year-olds correctly attributed animacy to animals and accurately refrained from anthropomorphizing artifacts and the non-humanoid robot Dash. However, 5-year-olds performed at chance for Nao, suggesting they may be confused about the psychological properties of a human-looking robot. Taken together, these findings reveal a developmental transition during the preschool years in the attribution of biological and psychological properties to social robot. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T17:01:13Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-dc02f84a22654c1286acd885845a7937 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1664-1078 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T17:01:13Z |
| publishDate | 2023-02-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Psychology |
| spelling | doaj.art-dc02f84a22654c1286acd885845a79372023-02-06T15:11:47ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782023-02-011310.3389/fpsyg.2022.11023701102370Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter?Elizabeth J. GoldmanAnna-Elisabeth BaumannDiane Poulin-DuboisPrior work has yielded contradicting evidence regarding the age at which children consistently and correctly categorize things as living or non-living. The present study tested children’s animacy judgments about robots with a Naïve Biology task. In the Naïve Biology task, 3- and 5-year-olds were asked if robots, animals, or artifacts possessed mechanical or biological internal parts. To gauge how much children anthropomorphize robots in comparison to animals and artifacts, children also responded to a set of interview questions. To examine the role of morphology, two robots were used: a humanoid robot (Nao) and a non-humanoid robot (Dash). To investigate the role of dynamic characteristics, children saw one robot behave in a goal-directed manner (i.e., moving towards a ball) and one robot exhibit non-goal-directed behavior (i.e., moving away from a ball). Children of both age groups correctly attributed biological insides to the animal and mechanical insides to the artifact. However, 3-year-olds seemed confused about what belonged inside both robots and assigned biological and mechanical insides equally. In contrast, 5-year-olds correctly assigned mechanical insides to both robots, regardless of the robot’s morphology or goal-directedness. Regarding the Animacy Interview, 3-year-olds performed at chance level when asked about the animacy of robots, animals, and artifacts. In contrast, 5-year-olds correctly attributed animacy to animals and accurately refrained from anthropomorphizing artifacts and the non-humanoid robot Dash. However, 5-year-olds performed at chance for Nao, suggesting they may be confused about the psychological properties of a human-looking robot. Taken together, these findings reveal a developmental transition during the preschool years in the attribution of biological and psychological properties to social robot.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1102370/fullsocial robotsNaïve Biologyanimacyinterviewpreschoolers |
| spellingShingle | Elizabeth J. Goldman Anna-Elisabeth Baumann Diane Poulin-Dubois Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter? Frontiers in Psychology social robots Naïve Biology animacy interview preschoolers |
| title | Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter? |
| title_full | Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter? |
| title_fullStr | Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter? |
| title_short | Preschoolers’ anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter? |
| title_sort | preschoolers anthropomorphizing of robots do human like properties matter |
| topic | social robots Naïve Biology animacy interview preschoolers |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1102370/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT elizabethjgoldman preschoolersanthropomorphizingofrobotsdohumanlikepropertiesmatter AT annaelisabethbaumann preschoolersanthropomorphizingofrobotsdohumanlikepropertiesmatter AT dianepoulindubois preschoolersanthropomorphizingofrobotsdohumanlikepropertiesmatter |