AI and toddlers: The impacts on early development | The TechTank Podcast

[00:00:00] Welcome to the TechTank Podcast.

[00:00:00] 欢迎来到 TechTank 播客。

I am your co-host, Nicol Turner Lee, senior fellow and director of the Center for Technology Innovation at the Brookings Institution.

我是你们的共同主持人，尼科尔·特纳·李，布鲁金斯学会高级研究员兼技术创新中心主任。

I’m excited about today’s conversation.

我对今天的谈话感到很兴奋。

It’s been some time since I’ve actually hosted a podcast, so I’m back, you guys.

我已经有一段时间没有真正主持播客了，所以我回来了，你们。

And, today, I want to talk about debates around kids’ use of technology.

今天，我想谈谈有关孩子使用技术的争论。

These debates have escalated in recent years as artificial intelligence has proliferated in schools, at home, and online.

近年来，随着人工智能在学校、家庭和网络中的普及，这些争论不断升级。

But the conversations typically focus on teens, young adults, and that’s not always the only groups that are actually impacted.

但谈话通常集中在青少年和年轻人身上，而这并不总是唯一真正受到影响的群体。

Teens and how they use chatbots for companionship, mental health support, or schoolwork is one thing, but what about the young people, the younger babies that are actually using technology?

青少年以及他们如何使用聊天机器人进行陪伴、心理健康支持或功课是一回事，但那些真正使用技术的年轻人、年幼的婴儿呢？

I think we really do not speak too much about them.

我认为我们确实没有过多谈论它们。

As AI is infiltrating screens, it’s reaching [00:01:00] children in their earliest stages of life as more companies promote toys and other AI-enabled devices and tools for parents.

随着人工智能渗透到屏幕中，随着越来越多的公司向父母推销玩具和其他支持人工智能的设备和工具，它正在影响生命最早阶段的儿童[00:01:00]。

But researchers are now examining how that can impact toddlers, yes, I said toddlers and even babies, who are at a stage of critical development.

但研究人员现在正在研究这会如何影响幼儿，是的，我说的是幼儿，甚至是处于关键发育阶段的婴儿。

I’m excited about this conversation.

我对这次谈话感到很兴奋。

Now, let me just admit I don’t have any toddlers at home.

现在，让我承认我家里没有小孩。

I used to.

我以前也是这样

They’re not toddlers, they’re young adults.

他们不是幼儿，而是年轻人。

But it’s important that we have this conversation for parents who are dealing with younger people who are impacted by technology.

但重要的是，我们为那些正在与受技术影响的年轻人打交道的父母进行这样的对话。

To discuss their research and more, I’m joined today by two of my Brookings colleagues in the Center for Universal Education (CUE), Sweta Shah and Kathy Hirsh-Pasek.

为了讨论他们的研究及更多内容，今天我和布鲁金斯大学普及教育中心 (CUE) 的两位同事 Sweta Shah 和 Kathy Hirsh-Pasek 一起讨论。

Sweta is a fellow in CUE and an expert in early childhood education and development.

Sweta 是 CUE 研究员，也是幼儿教育和发展领域的专家。

Kathy’s a senior fellow and professor of psychology at Temple University, who studies development of early language and the role of play in learning.

凯西是天普大学的高级研究员和心理学教授，研究早期语言的发展以及游戏在学习中的作用。

Most recently, both of their work has intersected with emerging technologies in a project entitled [00:02:00] “ Generation AI starts early.

最近，他们的两项工作都在一个名为 [00:02:00]“AI 时代很早就开始”的项目中与新兴技术相交叉。

” Let’s jump right into it, Kathy and Sweta.

“让我们直接开始吧，凯西和斯维塔。

Thank you for joining me this morning.

谢谢你今天早上加入我。

I know.

我知道。

It’s going to be fun.

这会很有趣。

No, let’s jump into this.

不，让我们开始吧。

I’m going to ask a few questions just to get us started because, as I said before, we’ve not necessarily talked about the role of AI or screens as it affects toddlers, babies!

为了让我们开始，我要问几个问题，因为正如我之前所说，我们不一定讨论人工智能或屏幕的作用，因为它会影响幼儿、婴儿！

So I’m really curious about this conversation as well, because a lot of my own work actually focuses on young adults.

所以我对这次对话也很好奇，因为我自己的很多工作实际上都集中在年轻人身上。

Obviously, young kids have interacted with technologies long before the rise of generative AI.

显然，早在生成式人工智能兴起之前，小孩子就已经与技术进行了互动。

Help me understand the landscape that was being studied and why it’s critical to examine this interaction at such young ages.

帮助我了解正在研究的情况，以及为什么在如此年轻的时候研究这种相互作用至关重要。

And I’mactually going to have both of you explain it, because you both have different backgrounds.

实际上我会让你们俩解释一下，因为你们都有不同的背景。

Sweta, why don’t we start with you?

Sweta，我们为什么不从你开始呢？

Why is it that we’re looking at this now, particularly when we think about the rise of emerging technologies like AI?

为什么我们现在要关注这个问题，特别是当我们考虑人工智能等新兴技术的崛起时？

Yeah.

是的。

Thanks, Nicol.

谢谢，尼科尔。

So you’re absolutely right.

所以你是完全正确的。

[00:03:00] This is not something that’s brand new that’s come up.

[00:03:00] 这并不是什么新鲜事。

There’s been res- we’ve had technology for children for a very long time.

长期以来，我们一直在为儿童提供技术。

And there’s been research that’s been going on looking at screen time, looking at apps, looking at tablet use.

一直有研究关注屏幕时间、应用程序和平板电脑的使用情况。

And during COVID, this really accelerated because so much of our daily lives became about technology and the use of technology.

在新冠疫情期间，这种情况确实加速了，因为我们日常生活的大部分内容都与技术和技术的使用有关。

What’s different now, though, is that AI does something different from other technology.

但现在不同的是，人工智能所做的事情与其他技术不同。

It interacts with children and with people.

它与孩子和人互动。

There’s a back and forth that happens.

会发生来回的情况。

There’s a social element.

有一个社交元素。

It also is going to adapt to what is being said.

它还将适应所说的内容。

So those are some different elements that are coming with AI.

这些是人工智能带来的一些不同元素。

And so there isn’t a lot of research on that, and that’s what we’re trying to do at Brookings, is trying to lead some of that research.

因此，这方面的研究并不多，这就是我们布鲁金斯学会正在努力做的事情，试图领导其中一些研究。

Can I jump in too?

我也可以跳进去吗？

So Nicol, thank you for this question.

尼科尔，谢谢你提出这个问题。

It’s [00:04:00] really important.

[00:04:00] 非常重要。

I want to lay some groundwork, okay?

我想打下一些基础，可以吗？

We’re talking about the under two set – just looking at screens two hours a day.

我们谈论的是两岁以下的人——每天只看屏幕两个小时。

Okay?

好的？

Try to process that for just a moment.

尝试暂时处理一下。

And by the time you’re four, four to eight, you are on screens a lot, okay?

当你四岁、四岁到八岁的时候，你就会经常出现在屏幕上，好吗？

We’re talking four hours a day on average.

我们平均每天聊天四个小时。

Now, let’s just think about that over the course of a week.

现在，让我们在一周内考虑一下这一点。

That’s four times seven, I think that’s 28 hours a week, which is more than a full-time job.

那是四乘以七，我想那是每周 28 小时，这比一份全职工作还多。

So we already had kids glued, and then last Octoberthere was an announcement that came across the airwaves, and that was that OpenAI was making a deal with Mattel .

所以我们已经让孩子们着迷了，然后去年 10 月广播里传来了一条消息，那就是 OpenAI 正在与 Mattel 达成协议。

And by the time we got to the holiday season, you had all of these toys that were flooding the market coming in from China.

当我们到了假期时，所有这些玩具都从中国涌入市场。

By the way, they don’t let [00:05:00] their kids in China, interact with these social companions, so to speak, that Sweta was discussing, but they were all over our marketplace.

顺便说一句，他们不让[00:05:00]他们在中国的孩子与这些社交伙伴互动，可以这么说，斯韦塔正在讨论，但他们遍布我们的市场。

And a recent review by the Boston Children’s interviewed parents who found that three to nine-year-olds, you ready for this?

波士顿儿童基金会最近的一篇评论采访了家长，他们发现三到九岁的孩子，你准备好了吗？

Over half of them are encountering AI daily.

其中超过一半的人每天都会遇到人工智能。

Daily!

日常的！

And 70% of the parents who completed the survey were sure that AI was going to enhance children’s learning.

70% 完成调查的家长确信人工智能将增强孩子的学习能力。

So, let’s put it together now.

所以，现在让我们把它放在一起。

You have kids who are already being impacted, young kids being impacted by things like AI.

有些孩子已经受到影响，年幼的孩子正在受到人工智能等事物的影响。

The parents think it’s going to be helpful, it’s cute, it’s engaging, and we have virtually no data to know the impact, but scientists are scared to death.

家长们认为这会有帮助，很可爱，很吸引人，我们几乎没有数据可以了解其影响，但科学家们却害怕极了。

Nicol, so if I could add to this, you know the [00:06:00] other piece that’s really important for people to understand is that AI has what we call child-facing, which is directly interacts with a child, and also adult-facing, which interacts with the adult.

尼科尔，所以如果我可以补充一点，你知道[00:06:00]对于人们理解来说真正重要的另一件事是人工智能具有我们所说的面向儿童的东西，它直接与孩子互动，也有面向成人的，它与成人互动。

What we’re seeing in, with young children is that some of these tools interact directly with a child, but a lot of these tools actually are interacting with the adult, but it’s in the child’s environment.

我们在幼儿身上看到的是，其中一些工具直接与孩子互动，但其中很多工具实际上是与成人互动，但这是在孩子的环境中。

So there’s no way for the child to even escape it because it’s part of the environment.

所以孩子根本无法逃避它，因为它是环境的一部分。

So even when there are, rules or,guidelines, some, you know, OpenAI and some others say that you can’t use certain kinds of tools unless you’re 13 or over, that’s fine, but what happens in the home is that the home is where you have all this technology.

因此，即使有规则或指南，有些人，你知道，OpenAI 和其他一些人说，除非你年满 13 岁或以上，否则不能使用某些类型的工具，这没关系，但在家里发生的情况是，家里就是你拥有所有这些技术的地方。

It could be used by an older brother or sister or by a parent, and the young child is going to interact with it, and that’s what can be challenging and worrisome.

它可能由哥哥或姐姐或父母使用，而年幼的孩子将与它互动，这可能是具有挑战性和令人担忧的。

Okay, so this is interesting, and I probably [00:07:00] sound like many parents who right now feel really bad that they kept their children in front of the television or on a screen.

好吧，这很有趣，我可能 [00:07:00] 听起来像许多父母，他们现在因为让孩子坐在电视机前或屏幕上而感到非常难过。

Yes, that was me.

是的，那就是我。

I had to keep them occupied while I cooked dinner or did other things.

当我做饭或做其他事情时，我必须让他们有事可做。

Okay?

好的？

I’m just saying.

我只是说说而已。

I’m with you, Nicol.

我和你在一起，尼科尔。

I have three kids.

我有三个孩子。

I totally get it.

我完全明白了。

I think, my question is, we’ve always had technology, as both of you have said.

我想，我的问题是，正如你们俩所说，我们一直拥有技术。

What makes AI so different?

是什么让人工智能如此不同？

And, Kathy, I know you wrote an article about when toys talk back, and you mentioned this partnership with Mattel.

而且，凯西，我知道您写了一篇关于玩具何时顶嘴的文章，并且您提到了与美泰的合作关系。

What makes this different?

这有何不同？

I thought AI could at least, be somewhat productive than static technology where the kid was just interacting with a screen versus AI, which could actually do other stuff.

我认为人工智能至少比静态技术更有生产力，在静态技术中孩子只是与屏幕交互，而人工智能实际上可以做其他事情。

I’d like to sit there for just a second.

我想在那儿坐一会儿。

Like, why is AI making this incredibly hard when we think about, as Sweta said, the extent to which young people are on technology?

就像斯维塔所说，当我们思考年轻人对技术的依赖程度时，为什么人工智能会让这变得异常困难？

First, let me take parents off the hook.

首先，让我帮父母摆脱困境。

[00:08:00] It’s hard to be a parent, and I’ll admit, I had my kids do something while I was trying to take a shower.

[00:08:00] 作为父母很难，我承认，当我想洗澡时，我让我的孩子们做了一些事情。

At least I knew they were safe.

至少我知道他们是安全的。

So, let’s ask now, how do we prevent the use of what I’ll call junk food, the equivalent of junk food, as AI comes onto the market, and ensure that they’re still eating healthy ingredients?

那么，现在让我们问，随着人工智能进入市场，我们如何防止使用我所说的垃圾食品，相当于垃圾食品，并确保他们仍然吃健康的食材？

Now, why are we worried?

现在，我们为什么担心？

Because the first stuff that came in the market was total junk food, okay?

因为第一批进入市场的东西完全是垃圾食品，好吗？

And what happens is these things are really engaging.

所发生的事情是这些事情真的很吸引人。

I don’t know if you’ve ever been around them, but I bought Wuffy the Dog, for example.

我不知道你是否曾经接触过它们，但例如我买了“Wuffy the Dog”。

And Wuffy the Dog wags its tail.

狗乌菲摇着尾巴。

It’s really happy.

真是太高兴了。

It seems like it wants to play with me, and some of these toys actually say, “Hey, I want to play.” And when you have to go, like you have to go to school, or something when you’re two or three.

它似乎想和我一起玩，有些玩具实际上会说：“嘿，我想玩。”当你必须去的时候，比如你必须去学校，或者当你两三岁的时候。

Mom says, “Have to go,” the toy [00:09:00] says, “Oh, you have to leave me?” This is bad stuff, okay?

妈妈说，“必须走，”玩具 [00:09:00] 说，“哦，你必须离开我吗？”这是坏事，好吗？

So the toy is very engaging, and it mimics what it’s like to engage with a human without really being a human.

所以这个玩具非常吸引人，它模仿了与人类互动的感觉，但并不是真正的人类。

There are lots of things we can put in as caveats.

我们可以添加很多内容作为警告。

New study out of Cambridge that was really just looking at what’s happening and, watching kids interact and talking to parents finds out the toy talks over little kids.

剑桥大学的一项新研究实际上只是观察正在发生的事情，观察孩子们的互动以及与父母的交谈，发现玩具会影响小孩子。

Why?

为什么？

Because it’s desperately hard to get anything to understand little kid speech.

因为要获得任何东西来理解小孩子的语言是非常困难的。

You know how parents work so hard at it.

你知道父母是多么努力地工作。

So, the AI doesn’t do any better, and the younger the kid, the worse the analysis by the AI, too.

所以，人工智能并没有做得更好，而且孩子越小，人工智能的分析也就越差。

These toys are engaging, but they are connecting the child to the World Wide Web.

这些玩具很吸引人，但它们正在将孩子与万维网连接起来。

So, PIRG did a study , asked one of the toys, and just said, “Hey, where would mommy hide matches?” All the kid wanted [00:10:00] to do was find the matches to light a candle like they do in their birthday cake, but came back and said not only where the matches might be, but teaching the c- the kid how to strike a match.

所以，PIRG 做了一项研究，询问其中一个玩具，然后说：“嘿，妈妈会把火柴藏在哪里？”孩子想要 [00:10:00] 做的就是找到火柴来点燃蜡烛，就像他们在生日蛋糕上做的那样，但回来后不仅说火柴可能在哪里，还教孩子如何划火柴。

This is not acceptable.

这是不可接受的。

So, I think if we want to put it into why are these so attractive, why are these flooding the market?

所以，我想如果我们想问为什么这些如此有吸引力，为什么这些会涌入市场？

One, they’re being advertised as non-screen alternatives at a time when screens are not popular.

第一，在屏幕不流行的时候，它们被宣传为非屏幕替代品。

Two, they’re deeply engaging.

第二，他们非常有吸引力。

They look like you’re getting a human companion for the kids, but it ain’t really human, and it has some other safety concerns that come along with it.

它们看起来像是为孩子们找到了一个人类伴侣，但它并不是真正的人类，而且还存在其他一些安全问题。

So again, we have to learn to make them better, to put restrictions on what’s sold, and to know how to tell the difference in the junk food and the high-quality food.

因此，我们必须学会让它们变得更好，对销售的产品进行限制，并知道如何区分垃圾食品和优质食品。

And I would just add, Nicol, that, [00:11:00] children have had toys, dolls, plush dogs for forever.

我想补充一点，尼科尔，[00:11:00]孩子们永远拥有玩具、洋娃娃、毛绒狗。

So, we’re not saying necessarily that it’s bad.

所以，我们不一定说它不好。

It’s just the ones that are out there right now have not been designed in a way that really simulates and what children really need regarding play and development.

只是现在市面上的那些设计并没有真正模拟孩子们在游戏和发展方面真正需要的东西。

So a real child is going to have tension, is going to have friction when it plays with another child.

所以一个真正的孩子在与另一个孩子玩耍时会感到紧张，会产生摩擦。

They’ll have disagreements, they’ll have fights, and that’s really normal and critical for their development.

他们会有分歧，会有争吵，这很正常，对他们的发展也至关重要。

And, what some of these toys are trying to simulate, as Kathy was saying, is that back and forth, but, Wolfie the dog isn’t going to fight back or argue with the baby, right?

而且，正如凯西所说，这些玩具中的一些试图模拟的是来回的，但是，狗沃尔菲不会反击或与婴儿争论，对吗？

Or with the child.

或者和孩子一起。

So there’s a critical piece of social development that really, you miss out on, or a child can miss out on, by having toys, that are simulating social development because what it’s doing is that it’s taking the child away from [00:12:00] what they really need, which is the child-to-child play and the child-to-adult interaction.

因此，你确实错过了社交发展的一个关键部分，或者孩子可能会因为拥有模拟社交发展的玩具而错过，因为它的作用是让孩子远离[00:12:00]他们真正需要的东西，即儿童与儿童的游戏和儿童与成人的互动。

So, we want AI to be additive and not to replace or derail development.

因此，我们希望人工智能具有附加性，而不是取代或破坏发展。

So, I want to stay on this for just a moment.

所以，我想在此停留片刻。

I think both of you are so correct, and it’s, kinda creepy, right?

我认为你们俩都是正确的，这有点令人毛骨悚然，对吧？

Because…the toy dog, which I did give my children one when I decided I didn’t want a real dog, you know- did not necessarily talk or bark.

因为……当我决定不想要一只真正的狗时，我确实给了我的孩子们一只玩具狗，你知道，它不一定会说话或吠叫。

It just kinda moved its head, and when the batteries went dead, that was it.

它只是稍微动了一下头，当电池没电时，就这样了。

So I do appreciate this conversation around, like, how these tools are wired to pick up human cognition, and most importantly, how they’re marketed as non-screen alternatives because they’re not necessarily on a screen.

因此，我确实很欣赏围绕这些工具如何连接以获取人类认知的对话，最重要的是，它们如何作为非屏幕替代品进行营销，因为它们不一定在屏幕上。

You know thequestion I have for both of you is, like, how did we get to, this point where AI is embedded in all of these, toys as well as a significant part of the play experience, right?

你知道我对你们俩提出的问题是，我们是如何做到人工智能嵌入到所有这些玩具以及游戏体验的重要组成部分的这一点，对吧？

Because there’s this other idea of interactive [00:13:00] experiences, which in many respects encourages different types of play.

因为还有互动 [00:13:00] 体验的另一种想法，它在很多方面鼓励不同类型的游戏。

Come on, let’s face it, ladies.

来吧，让我们面对现实吧，女士们。

People are not going on the playground playing duck goose the way we used to.

人们不再像以前那样在操场上玩鸭鹅游戏。

I, not too long ago asked my daughter to play, round robin, and she looked at me a little weird like she didn’t know what I was talking about because play overall has declined .

不久前，我让我女儿玩循环赛，她看着我的眼神有点奇怪，好像她不知道我在说什么，因为整体游戏水平下降了。

So, I really want to kinda keep us in this space for a minute, because I think history is dictating that we’ve been in this wave for quite some time, and maybe it’s hard to recover back to traditional forms of play as we’ve had before because of where society has gone.

所以，我真的想让我们在这个空间停留一分钟，因为我认为历史表明我们已经处于这一浪潮中相当长一段时间了，而且由于社会已经发展到了某种程度，也许很难恢复到我们以前的传统游戏形式。

You’re so right.

你说得太对了。

There’s a guy named Ed Zigler who was really one of the founders of developmental psychology, a very big deal in our field, and is one of the founders of Head Start, and he wrote late in his life that play was under siege.

有一个名叫埃德·齐格勒（Ed Zigler）的人，他确实是发展心理学的创始人之一，这在我们的领域是一件非常重要的事情，也是 Head Start 的创始人之一，他在晚年写道，游戏受到了围攻。

That is true.

确实如此。

That is true.

确实如此。

However, Nicol, I have some really good news for you, and that is our recent surveys tell us that [00:14:00] parents are starting to get the message that play is not the antithesis of learning, but our research is telling us that play actually is learning.

然而，尼科尔，我有一些非常好的消息要告诉你，那就是我们最近的调查告诉我们，[00:14:00]父母开始意识到玩耍并不是学习的对立面，但我们的研究告诉我们，玩耍实际上就是学习。

Why do I say that?

我为什么这么说呢？

It turns out the very features that are embodied natural in play, being active and engaged when it’s meaningful, when it’s socially interactive, let me repeat that term, socially interactive, and when it’s joyful, that’s how human brains learn.

事实证明，这些特征在游戏中自然体现出来，当有意义的时候，当它是社交互动的时候，让我重复一下这个词，社交互动的，当它是快乐的时候，这就是人类大脑学习的方式。

Isn’t that amazing?

这不是很神奇吗？

That’s how human brains learn.

这就是人类大脑的学习方式。

So, play mimics how human brains learn.

因此，游戏模仿了人类大脑的学习方式。

So maybe that’s why, five states already have passed laws to have more playful learning in the classroom, and why parents are starting to get the message and why, as I said, in China, they’re going maybe we have to get kids off screens, or only three hours a weekend are they allowed to be on screens, and they’re literally shut down.

所以也许这就是为什么，五个州已经通过了法律，在课堂上进行更多有趣的学习，为什么父母开始明白这一信息，为什么正如我所说，在中国，他们可能必须让孩子们离开屏幕，或者每周只允许他们在屏幕上呆三个小时，而且他们实际上被关闭了。

So what are the [00:15:00] Chinese getting that we’re not getting?

那么，[00:15:00]中国人得到了哪些我们没有得到的东西呢？

By the way, we just did a survey in China, and the parents there, too, 70%, recognize that play and learning go together .

顺便说一句，我们刚刚在中国做了一项调查，那里的家长也有70%认为玩耍和学习是相辅相成的。

Sowe are in the middle of a seismic shift right now, where play is coming back.

索威现在正处于一场巨大的转变之中，比赛正在回归。

Now, the question is where AI fits into that.

现在的问题是人工智能在其中的应用。

You asked, why is it in everything?

你问，为什么一切都有它？

because it’s cool, and it’s effective, and it’sefficient, but it may not be good for the youngest kids.

因为它很酷，而且很有效，而且很有效率，但它可能不适合最小的孩子。

We already know there are some things creeping up in the teen literature to suggest that when you make teen companions, kids will do some rather dangerous things, and we know that when they recruit therapists, they’ll do some dangerous things.

我们已经知道，青少年文学中出现了一些事情，表明当你结交青少年伴侣时，孩子们会做一些相当危险的事情，而且我们知道，当他们招募治疗师时，他们会做一些危险的事情。

What I would like to argue, however, is that if you really want to get to the root of where we go, and understanding AI and its potential impact on kids, we have to go to the early years.

然而，我想说的是，如果你真的想追根溯源，了解人工智能及其对孩子的潜在影响，我们就必须回到早期。

And if I may just take one more moment to play this out for [00:16:00] you as to why.

如果我可以再花一点时间为 [00:16:00] 你解释一下为什么。

In the early years, as we did a lot of technology, and we’ve all got phones, and it was personalized, what happened is we found that the adult-child interaction, which is so important for brain development and brain connectivity, that was disrupted by parents always picking up their phones okay?

早些年，我们做了很多技术，我们都有手机，而且是个性化的，我们发现，对于大脑发育和大脑连接非常重要的成人与儿童的互动，被父母总是拿起手机打乱了，好吗？

And we saw it, and we saw that kids were learning less and parents were talking less.

我们看到了，我们看到孩子们学的东西越来越少，家长们的说话也越来越少。

And I should ask your viewers how often they think parents pick up their phone when their kids are there.

我应该问你们的观众，他们认为当孩子在场时，父母拿起手机的频率有多少。

The answer?

答案是什么呢？

Do you have your own answer yet?

你有自己的答案了吗？

It’s every five minutes.

每五分钟一次。

Okay, now imagine how disruptive that is if you’re engaging with your kid.

好吧，现在想象一下，如果你和你的孩子交往，这会有多大的破坏性。

Point two with a lot of the technology is that it kinda displaced human interaction, and we are seeing that.

许多技术的第二点是它有点取代了人类互动，我们正在看到这一点。

That’s one of the arguments that Jonathan Haidt and many others are making as far as screen time.

这是乔纳森·海特和其他许多人就屏幕时间提出的论点之一。

It’s taking [00:17:00] over for when kids might have been with other kids, for when parents might have been with their kids.

当孩子们可能和其他孩子在一起的时候，当父母可能和他们的孩子在一起的时候，它会取代[00:17:00]。

But now I want to take you to early childhood and make a more serious argument.

但现在我想带你回到童年时期并进行更严肃的论证。

As we build these things into toys that simulate, simulate but are not real human-to-human interaction, and Sweta made the most important point here about who are these sycophants?

当我们将这些东西构建成模拟、模拟但不是真正的人与人互动的玩具时，Sweta 在这里提出了最重要的一点：这些阿谀奉承者是谁？

You know always agreeing with the kid.

你知道总是同意孩子的观点。

And you’re going to leave them and go and then meet a real three-year-old?

你打算离开他们去见一个真正的三岁孩子吗？

Goodluck.

祝你好运。

Okay, so, it’s derailing.

好吧，所以，它脱轨了。

It’s derailing the human-to-human connection.

它正在破坏人与人之间的联系。

We have every reason to believe as scientists that young children will misinterpret these toys, the social companion toys, as human, and that is a problem for human brain development and for development and the trajectory of development if we want our children to thrive.

作为科学家，我们有充分的理由相信，幼儿会将这些玩具、社交伴侣玩具误解为人类，如果我们希望我们的孩子茁壮成长，这对人类大脑发育、发展和发展轨迹来说都是一个问题。

So, disruption, [00:18:00] displacement, and derailment.

所以，破坏、[00:18:00]位移和出轨。

So this is so interesting, because as you were speaking, I was thinking of a [00:19:00] couple of things.

所以这很有趣，因为当你说话时，我正在考虑 [00:19:00] 几件事。

American Academy of Pediatrics has given these limitations on screen time.

美国儿科学会对屏幕时间给出了这些限制。

Under 18 months, zero screen time, 18 to 24 months, high-quality educational programs, over two to five, probably one hour.

18个月以下，零放映时间，18到24个月，高质量的教育节目，超过两到五个，可能一小时。

And then you said something, Kathy, that it got me thinking, because I don’t want us to be totally Debbie Downers, but I want to talk about this before I go into the next part of our conversation.

然后你说了一些话，凯西，这让我思考，因为我不想让我们完全成为黛比·唐纳斯，但我想在进入下一部分谈话之前先谈谈这个。

What about those applications, even those enabled with AI, that can help young people?

那些可以帮助年轻人的应用程序，即使是那些支持人工智能的应用程序又如何呢？

I just think about young people, who are unable to speak at an early age, right because of, probably trauma or some type of developmental disability.

我只想到年轻人，他们在很小的时候就无法说话，可能是因为创伤或某种类型的发育障碍。

What about young people, where in the classroom it’s hard to figure out their ordering of numbers, that AI-enabled applications or toys, or play can help with that.

对于年轻人来说，在课堂上很难弄清楚他们的数字顺序，人工智能应用程序或玩具或游戏可以帮助解决这个问题。

Are there going to be use cases where this makes sense?

是否存在有意义的用例？

Because I’d love to hear from both of you, [00:20:00] where AI can be balanced so that these trade-offs on mental health and developmental, abilities are, not completely, misunderstood, but there are other areas where we can actually see AI work.

因为我很想听听你们俩的意见，[00:20:00]人工智能可以在哪里得到平衡，这样心理健康和发展能力之间的权衡就不会完全被误解，但我们实际上可以在其他领域看到人工智能的工作。

And I’m just speaking from my own experience with my own kids, where there were some technological advancements that did help them with their own integration, in their early years when it came to school.

我只是根据我自己和自己孩子的经验来谈，在他们上学的早年，一些技术进步确实帮助他们融入了自己的生活。

Yeah, Nicol.

是的，尼科尔。

Really great question, and I think it’s important for the audience to know that we are not anti-tech or anti-AI necessarily.

这是一个很好的问题，我认为让观众知道我们不一定是反科技或反人工智能很重要。

Yeah.

是的。

We just believe that it really needs to be designed considering the child at the center and, with outcomes that are looking at child development.

我们只是相信，它的设计确实需要考虑到以儿童为中心，并且其结果着眼于儿童的发展。

Right now, obviously, there’s a for-profit model for all companies, and their objective is to make money.

显然，现在所有公司都有一个营利模式，他们的目标是赚钱。

And if you’re looking at videos, it’s about engagements and clicks.

如果你看视频，你会发现它与参与度和点击量有关。

[00:21:00] And so that model, we need to think about that model and see how we can influence that model to think more about, how can money be made from, for companies, really when they’re looking at children at the center and outcomes that are different from simply clicks and engagement.

[00:21:00] 因此，对于这个模型，我们需要考虑这个模型，看看我们如何能够影响这个模型，让他们更多地思考，当公司以儿童为中心，以及与简单的点击和参与不同的结果时，如何从中赚钱。

That’s kind of one thing.

这是一回事。

Well, I think you’re absolutely right, and I want to underscore what Swetha said.

嗯，我认为你完全正确，我想强调 Swetha 所说的话。

We’re not anti-tech.

我们并不反科技。

But let me try to put things in context.

但让我试着把事情放在上下文中。

In 2015, I wrote an article outlining the characteristics you would need to have to really be an educational app as opposed to an educational app.

2015 年，我写了一篇文章，概述了真正成为教育应用程序而不是教育应用程序所需的特征。

In 2021, we did another study and we asked how many, of the apps out there, of the 100 most downloaded apps, how many of them pass the bar?

2021 年，我们进行了另一项研究，询问在下载次数最多的 100 个应用程序中，有多少个通过了标准？

This was a study that was run [00:22:00] by Jenny, out of Jenny Radesky’s lab.

这是 Jenny Radesky 实验室 [00:22:00] 进行的一项研究。

And what did we find?

我们发现了什么？

Out of the 100 most downloaded apps, we found that three of them actually matched our criteria.

在下载次数最多的 100 个应用程序中，我们发现其中三个实际上符合我们的标准。

That’s a problem.

这是一个问题。

It means there’s a lot of stuff spewing out that is not good.

这意味着有很多不好的东西喷涌而出。

Now, the question that you ask is can we make good AI learning material?

现在，你问的问题是我们能做出好的人工智能学习材料吗？

Without question we can.

毫无疑问我们可以。

Let me give you some examples.

让我举一些例子。

First of all, you recall that I divided it into social companions and learning products, okay?

首先你还记得我把它分为社交伴侣和学习产品好吗？

The social companions right now are more of a problem.

现在的社交伙伴更成问题。

We really need to sort out what is possible there.

我们确实需要弄清楚那里有什么可能。

But let’s go to the learning opportunities.

但让我们看看学习机会。

Here I think there’s a real potential for doing a lot of good.

我认为在这里确实有潜力做很多好事。

Let’s start with a product that came out many years ago, I think it was Moxie it was called, and it was used withautistic kids, [00:23:00] and they got quite attached to Moxie.

让我们从多年前推出的一款产品开始，我想它叫 Moxie，它被用于自闭症儿童，[00:23:00] 他们对 Moxie 非常依恋。

Now, of course, one of the problems is Moxie went off the market and these kids lost their beloved Moxie.

当然，现在的问题之一是 Moxie 退出市场，这些孩子失去了他们心爱的 Moxie。

But there’s no reason why you can’t create wonderful tools that will enrich and enable kids with neurodiversity to be able to do things that they might not be able to have done otherwise.

但是，你没有理由不能创造出精彩的工具来丰富和使具有神经多样性的孩子能够做他们可能无法做的事情。

Now, even for the general population, there’s a wonderful researcher named Ying Xu.

现在，即使对于普通大众来说，也有一位出色的研究员，名叫徐颖。

She’s out of Harvard, and she has been working on creating characters in television programs that actually engage with the audience.

她毕业于哈佛，一直致力于在电视节目中创造真正与观众互动的角色。

How cool is that?

那有多酷？

And what she finds is that when those, what we call in the field parasocial characters, engage with kids, they ask more questions.

她发现，当那些我们在该领域称为准社会角色的人与孩子们互动时，他们会提出更多问题。

And when they ask more questions and they get more [00:24:00] conversations, that can build language skills and pre-literacy skills.

当他们提出更多问题并进行更多 [00:24:00] 对话时，可以培养语言技能和识字前技能。

So, there are a lot of things we can do that I think are possible if we’re careful.

因此，我认为如果我们小心的话，我们可以做很多事情。

And so this is a lesson, I would say, for developers.

所以我想说，这对开发人员来说是一个教训。

Yes, let’s develop those products, but please, I beg you not to just go for marketplace, but to do high-quality foods, so to speak.

是的，让我们开发这些产品，但是，我请求你们不要只去市场，而是要做高质量的食品，可以这么说。

And to do it, if you will, in concert with the scientists who are doing the real work to back it up.

如果你愿意的话，要与正在做实际工作来支持它的科学家合作来做到这一点。

Yes.

是的。

I would just add onto what Kathy said, that, companies, as you were asking about what are the benefits, and we are seeing, as Kathy mentioned, a number of products that hold promise.

我想补充一下凯西所说的，即公司，正如您所问的，有什么好处，正如凯西提到的，我们看到了许多有前途的产品。

They haven’t been tested yet.

他们还没有经过测试。

They’re still new.

它们还是新的。

So, for children, she mentioned with neurodiversity or autism, children with other disabilities and special needs, children in [00:25:00] multilingual classrooms where a teacher needs to kind of understand a child that maybe doesn’t speak the language of the classroom.

因此，对于儿童，她提到了患有神经多样性或自闭症的儿童、患有其他残疾和特殊需要的儿童、[00:25:00]多语言教室中的儿童，老师需要在某种程度上理解可能不会说课堂语言的孩子。

So, there are potentially a lot of really good uses for it, and she rightly points out that what we’re asking for industry is to work with us.

因此，它可能有很多真正好的用途，她正确地指出，我们要求业界与我们合作。

They can probably make more money actually if they work with us and have better products because parents are then going to buy those better products.

如果他们与我们合作并拥有更好的产品，他们实际上可能会赚更多的钱，因为父母会购买这些更好的产品。

Parents are now becoming more, they’re really critiquing these products.

现在家长们越来越多地批评这些产品。

They’re really thinking about what’s out there and what they want to present to their children.

他们真正考虑的是外面有什么以及他们想向孩子们展示什么。

So, it’s really in industry’s benefit to think about how to collaborate and for us to think about how do we create an ecosystem that’s going to support children’s development.

因此，思考如何合作以及我们如何创建一个支持儿童发展的生态系统确实对行业有利。

Yeah.

是的。

But you both had me thinking about the work that I’m doing at Brookings, which is around our AI Equity Lab, which assumes that these AI products are built with subject matter experts at the table.

但你们俩让我思考了我在布鲁金斯学会所做的工作，该工作是围绕我们的人工智能公平实验室进行的，该实验室假设这些人工智能产品是由主题专家在桌上构建的。

So it sounds to me-

所以在我看来——

…That many of the things that we’re [00:26:00] talking about has to do with the failure to have child development specialists, psychologists, teachers, guidance counselors, anybody out there who understands, younger people at the table in developing these products.

......我们[00:26:00]谈论的许多事情都与未能让儿童发展专家、心理学家、教师、指导顾问、任何理解的人、年轻人参与开发这些产品有关。

Kathy, this goes back to junk food.

凯西，这又回到了垃圾食品。

You know, obviously, junk food gets made because people think that there’s an incentive to make it, but most importantly, there’s no healthy people sitting at the table.

你知道，显然，垃圾食品的产生是因为人们认为有动力去做，但最重要的是，餐桌上没有健康的人。

You’re so right, Nicol.

你说得很对，尼科尔。

You’re kind of nailing this, and this is why I think…what we’ve been doing through a series of webinars at Brookings and, our September 9th, gathering and convening, we’re going to have the parents.

你有点搞清楚了这一点，这就是为什么我认为……我们通过布鲁金斯学会的一系列网络研讨会以及 9 月 9 日的聚会和召集所做的事情，我们将有家长参加。

We’re going to have the policymakers.

我们将有政策制定者。

We’re going to have the industry people.

我们将拥有行业人士。

We’re going to have the scientists, and at the end of the day, we’re going to have a task force.

我们将拥有科学家，最终我们将拥有一个特别工作组。

And that task force will be able, with your help, with Sweta’s help, with all the people in the room, to [00:27:00] say, “What do we want to see as regulations so we know our kids are getting a healthy diet?”

在您的帮助下，在 Sweta 的帮助下，在房间里的所有人的帮助下，该工作组将能够 [00:27:00] 说：“我们希望看到什么法规，以便我们知道我们的孩子正在获得健康的饮食？”

And how does it need to be built to ensure that?

需要如何构建才能确保这一点？

Now you know I’m a sociologist.

现在你知道我是一名社会学家。

I want to put out there for both of you, then I want to talk about policy suggestions.

我想给你们俩讲一下，然后我想谈谈政策建议。

Not all families though are built the same, y’all.

不过，并不是所有的家庭都是一样的，你们大家。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思？

Part of the challenge that we have with some of the debates on screen time among older children has to do with the fact that we’re not always sensitizing the experiences of low income, rural, students of color, in particular parents who have toddlers of color who are basically bracing a whole lot of things at the same time.

我们在大龄儿童关于屏幕时间的一些争论中遇到的部分挑战与这样一个事实有关：我们并不总是对低收入、农村、有色人种学生的经历敏感，尤其是那些有有色人种幼儿的父母，他们基本上同时要面对很多事情。

They might be under-employed.

他们可能就业不足。

They might not have available childcare.

他们可能没有可用的托儿服务。

They may not have a support system that can provide the resources to help them understand what’s actually happening.

他们可能没有支持系统来提供资源来帮助他们了解实际发生的情况。

For me, this is something that we also need to be culturally sensitive to.

对我来说，这也是我们需要在文化上保持敏感的事情。

That, as families progress in this new modern age where there are just so more stresses than [00:28:00] perhaps, parents had, decades ago.

随着家庭在这个新的现代时代的进步，父母所面临的压力可能比几十年前[00:28:00]还要多。

Is this also something that we have to be sensitive when it comes to, different communities and how young people are interacting with tech and society?

当涉及到不同的社区以及年轻人如何与科技和社会互动时，这也是我们必须保持敏感的事情吗？

You gotta think about it, Kathy?

你得考虑一下，凯西？

And so what a lot of kids can’t go outside today because of the communities- that they live in, so alternatives to play might be, virtually impossible outside of technology.

因此，今天很多孩子因为他们居住的社区而无法外出，所以除了技术之外，几乎不可能有其他的玩耍方式。

Yeah.

是的。

Nicol, you hit the nail on the head.

尼可，你说得一中要害。

This is such a critical piece, and it’s really missing right now, both from the data side and from the dialogue side.

这是一个非常关键的部分，无论是从数据方面还是从对话方面，现在都确实缺少它。

you mentioned guidelines from American Academy of Pediatrics, and there are guidelines coming out from Common Sense Media and others, and they’re not bad guidelines, of course.

你提到了美国儿科学会的指南，常识媒体和其他机构也有指南，当然，它们都不是坏指南。

But that is a piece, like the, socioeconomic status piece and the race piece are absolutely missing as lenses when they’re thinking about that guidance, and that’s something that we at Brookings really want to, add to the, research and the [00:29:00] data and the conversation.

但这是一个片段，就像社会经济地位片段和种族片段一样，当他们考虑该指导时，绝对缺少镜头，而这是我们布鲁金斯学会真正想要添加到研究和[00:29:00]数据和对话中的东西。

We really want to understand, what are the lived experiences of people of different socioeconomic statuses?

我们真的想了解，不同社会经济地位的人的生活经历是什么？

Different, racial groups.

不同的种族群体。

Because you’re absolutely right.

因为你是绝对正确的。

a single mom that has two jobs.

有两份工作的单亲妈妈。