Abstract
Given the increasingly important role of “clever” technology within primary school setting this study investigated aspects of young children’s representation of intelligent (computational) devices. 230 children aged 7 to 11 years were asked to write a story about either a computer, a robot or a control object, a mountain bike. A comparison group of adults was also tested.
Stories were analysed in terms of a number of general features including: descriptions of target objects, the use, if at all, of the term “program”, and the setting and function of target objects. Furthermore, semantic information as to the ontological status of these objects was derived from an analysis of pronoun and verb-phrase use.
There was strong evidence that, across the age range, the computer and the robot were represented as more complex objects and were more likely to be attributed with animate characteristics than the bike. Developmentally, children shifted from describing perceptually salient features of the computer/robot to more abstract features, especially programmability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Applebee, A. N. (1978).The Child’s Concept of Story: Ages Two to Seventeen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Billingham, R. E., & Fu, V. R. (1980). Animistic thinking between parents and children.Journal of Psychology, 105, 35–39.
Boden, M. A. (1980). Artificial Intelligence and intellectual imperialism. In A. J. Chapman & D. M. Jones (Eds.),Models of Man (pp. 129–143). Leicester: British Psychology Society.
Chambers, J. H., & Ascoine, F. R. (1987). The effects of prosocial and aggressive videogames on children’s donating and helping.Journal of Genetic Psychology, 148, 499–505.
Churchland, P. M., & Churchland, P. S. (1990). Could a machine think?Scientific American, January 1990.
Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit.Psychological Bulletin, 70, 213–220.
Cowie, H. (1983). An approach to the evaluation of children’s writing.Early Child Development and Care, 12, 319–331.
Du Boulay, B., O’Shea, T., & Monk, J. (1981). The black box inside the glass box: Presenting computing concepts to novices.International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 14, 237–249.
Givon, T. (1979).On Understanding Grammar: Perspectives in Neurolinguistics and Psycholinguistics. London: Academic Press.
Harvey, T. J., & Wilson (1985). Gender differences in attitudes towards microcomputers shown by primary and secondary school pupils.British Journal of Educational Technology, 16, 183–187.
Hatano, G., Siegler, R. S., Richards, D. D., Ingaki, K., Stavy, R., & Wax, N. (1993). The Development of biological knowledge: A multinational study.Cognitive Development, 8, 47–62.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1980). Mental models in cognitive science.Cognitive Science, 4, 71–115.
Keenan, E. L. (1976). Towards a universal definition of subject. In C. N. Li (Ed.),Subject and opic. New York: Academic Press.
Keil, F. C. (1989).Concepts, Kinds and Cognitive Development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kurland, D. M., & Pea, R. D. (1985). Children’s mental models of recursive Logo programs.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1, 235–243.
Laurendeau, M., & Pinard, A. (1962).Causal Thinking in the Child. New York: International Universities Press.
Li, C. (1976). Subject and Topic: A new Typology of Language. In C. N. Li (Ed.),Subject and Topic (pp. 457–491). New York: Academic Press.
Lipman, M. (1988).Philosophy goes to school. Philadelphia, Penn: Temple University Press.
Lipman, M. (1991).Thinking in Education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, D. C. (1988).Ethnographic methods for studying microcomputer implementation in schools. Working paper, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, George Washington University.
Oatley, K., & Yuill, N. (1985). Perception of personal and interpersonal action in a cartoon film.British Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 115–124.
Richards, D. D., & Siegler, R. S. (1986). Children’s understandings of the attributes of life.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 42, 1–22.
Scaife, M., & Taylor, J. (1991). Graduated learning environments for developing computational concepts.Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 2 (2), 31–42.
Scaife, M., & van Duuren, M. A. (in press). Do computers have brains? What children believe about intelligent artefacts.British Journal of Developmental Psychology.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Post-Gordon, J. C., & Rodasta, A. L. (1988). Effects of playing videogames on children’s aggressive and other behaviors.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 454–460.
Searle, J. (1990). Is the brain’s mind a computer program?Scientific American, January 1990.
Senior, S. (1989).Using IT across the National Curriculum. Tunstall: Owlet.
Sheingold, K., Hawkins, J., & Char, C. (1984). “I’m the thinkist, you’re the typist”: The interaction of technology and the social life of the classroom.Journal of Social Issues.40 (3), 49–61.
Stein, N. L. (1988). The development of children’s story telling skill. In M. B. Franklin & S. S. Barten (Eds.),Child language: A book of Readings. New York: Oxford University Press.
Suchman, L. (1987).Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human Machine Communication, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tulviste, P. (1982). Is there a form of verbal thought specific to childhood?Soviet Psychology, 11, 3–17.
Turkle, S. (1984).The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York: Simon and Schuster.
van Duuren, M. A. (1994). The attribution of brain-like properties. How do children regard “intelligent” objects? Unpublished manuscript.
van Duuren, M. A. (1994). The use of intelligent technology at home and at school: What do parents think?British Journal of Educational Technology, 25, 3, 231–233.
Wilkinson, A., Barnsley, G., Hanna, P., & Swan, M. (1980).Assessing Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van Duuren, M., Scaife, M. How do children represent intelligent technology?. Eur J Psychol Educ 10, 289–301 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172922
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172922