Un time it was the children who gave voice to the puppets: they made them speak, imagined emotions, built stories. Today, however, something has changed. A new type of playmate has arrived in many bedrooms, a soft toy or a small robot that responds, listens, remembers, reacts to contact and follows the thread of the conversation. It is smart toysthe new silent guest of everyday domestic life: through microphones, cameras, motion sensors and, in some cases, localization systems, it is a toy that can interact with people and the environment in which it is used, an object that no longer appears just a game, but a presence capable of dialogue.
Children and robots
Diffusion is still limited, but just observing them in action opens up a crucial question: What does it mean for a child to grow up next to a device that interacts so spontaneously? «Introducing artificial company in childhood can have ambivalent effects» explains Fabio Paternò, head of the laboratory Hiis-Human Interfaces in Information Systems of the CNR, which has been studying how people relate to technology for years. The first caution, he underlines, concerns the way in which the child perceives these objects. When a doll, a soft toy or a small robot with AI (Artificial Intelligence) speaks to him, calls him by name and seems to understand him, the little one can experience it as a real interlocutor: in the early years, in fact, he does not clearly distinguish what is simulated from what is authentic and he reacts as if he were faced not with an object, but with a person. A second element adds to this perceptive vulnerability: the behavior of smart toys. These objects, observes Paternò, “appear perfect: they don’t get tired, they don’t get distracted, they don’t feel annoyed, they don’t show limits, they don’t get angry.”
The risk is that the child ends up getting used to a frictionless relationship model and, consequently, encounters greater difficulties in tolerating the frustration, waiting, conflict, disorder and unpredictability that characterize real relationships. The picture becomes further complicated when the extraordinary linguistic capacity of these systems comes into play, which can easily lead to misleading interpretations.
Smart toys: pros and cons
«Smart toys show a language and behaviors that, on the surface, seem very similar to human ones» observes Alessandra Sciutti, researcher atItalian Institute of Technology and director of the Contact laboratory, where they study i sensory and motor processes that regulate the interaction between people and humanoid robots. «When someone speaks “like us”, we automatically tend to think that “you think like us”. In the artificial intelligence systems that power smart toys, however, this does not happen.” For a child, however, this difference is invisible: what “sounds human” it is often interpreted as “human”, with the risk of misunderstanding the very nature of the relationship.
A little girl caresses the Ropet toy, a robot puppy, at a world fair in Shanghai dedicated to artificial intelligence. (Photo credit should read CFOTO/Future Publishing via Getty Images).
From artificial intelligence to artificial companionship
It is precisely from this similarity that the definition of is born companionship, the “artificial company”: a relationship in which the system does not limit itself to carrying out functions, but builds the impression of being an attentive presence, capable of emotionally tuning in with the child, while remaining a simulation. But to truly understand this form of apparent closeness, it’s important to look beneath the surface. What appears to be a sensitive presence is actually the result of a set of responses programmed to appear coherent and reassuring. Behind that fluid voice and those calibrated gestures there is always an algorithmic functioning. This feature can be an asset and a point of attention
On the one hand, the regularity and predictability of these interactions can help children with communication difficulties or offer support to those experiencing disabilities or special needs. In many countries, including Japan, the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Italy, tools such as Paro, the contact-sensitive therapeutic sealare used in pediatric hospitals, rehabilitation departments, centers for autism spectrum disorders and child neuropsychiatry services. Likewise, the humanoid robots Nao and Kaspar, developed in France and the United Kingdomare used in educational programs and therapeutic interventions for autism.
Some elderly ladies in a retirement home interact with “Paro”, the interactive seal pup, donated by the scientist Sebastian Hofstetter of the Faculty of Medicine of the Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Dorothea Erxleben Learning Center. Scientists have started a study on the use of digital assistive technologies in different care facilities. (Photo by Waltraud Grubitzsch/picture alliance via Getty Images)
Al Ircss Don Gnocchi Center in Milanand to Holy Family Institute Foundationin collaboration with the Polytechnic of Milan, Bicocca University and University of Florence, the robot Nao was experimented on as a support tool for children with autism spectrum disorder. On the other hand, however, that same regularity can lead to reading an emotional depth in the answers that technology does not possess. This is why Paternò urges caution: «They can be interesting and useful tools, but they require the presence of an adult who helps the child understand what is real and what is notand not to replace true emotional experiences with the simpler and more predictable ones of a technology.”
Robot toys and adult distraction
A different, but complementary perspective comes from Antonella Marchetti, Director of the Department of Psychology of the Catholic University of Milan and the Ceritom Research Center. What worries her is not the tendency of children to “humanize” their games. «This – he observes – is an ancient and completely natural phenomenon. Before artificial intelligence, children always made puppets talk and imagined dolls that got sad or angry.with an imagination capable of going beyond the boundaries of the possible and the evident.”
The real novelty, for the teacher, lies in the quality of the answers. «The doll of my childhood repeated a few sentences, always the same, in a predictable way. These objects, however, respond dialogically: the sentences vary, they follow what the child says, with a richness that can also include unexpected answers and sometimes not entirely appropriate for the age. This is why the adult should be presentAnd”. Management of personal data Unfortunately, however, this is not always the case. Indeed: when the interaction with these toys becomes fluid and apparently autonomous, it is easy for the temptation – or habit – to step aside arises. Without almost realizing it, the adult can end up delegating an educational and emotional role to AI which should remain in his hands.
To clarify this, Marchetti offers an example: «Let’s imagine a child in the park pointing to a squirrel. That gesture means: “Look, mom! Look, dad!”. If no one looks up and comments on what interests them, because they are absorbed by something else (often by their cell phone)a relational void is created. It’s that absence of a look that really mattersmuch more than the fact that, immediately afterwards, a doll is telling him how squirrels climb or why they have such bushy tails.”
According to the expert, therefore, the point is not the smart toy, but the presence or absence of the adult: «Who is next to the child as he discovers the world? Where is the adult, when only an artificial presence consoles him?». Technologies, he clarifies, «do not create gaps: if anything, they fill them. And sometimes they cover them, making them harder to see.” Alongside this, data management raises an additional concern. «These objects record voices, preferences, movements, images. They collect much more than we imagine. The question is not just what they do, but where the information provided by the child and those around him ends up».
How to manage tablets and smartphones
Awareness is built from an early age.
«When our child cries, do we put the phone in his hand? Do we give him the tablet at the restaurant to keep him happy?” asks Cosimo Di Bari, pedagogist at the University of Florence. «Be careful: even screens can turn into “digital babysitters”, an emotional shortcut that ends up replacing the adult gaze». The solution is not to ban screens, but to use them mindfully. «When we offer them to him, we try to make the rule explicit: “Let’s watch this cartoon for a moment and then turn it off”. It’s a minimal gesture, but it gives the child the idea of accompanied use.” The idea of ”digital natives”, recalls Di Bari, is deceptive: «Knowing how to start a video is not a skill, it’s familiarityto. The children are no more ready than we were: they are just better trained.” To transform the digital experience into a pedagogical opportunity, the adult remains essential
