'Smart' toys helping to make smart kids: a different type of interface

This UK study, codenamed CACHET (Computers and Children's Electronic Toys), is a wide-ranging exploration of issues involving the use of toys in conjunction with computer software in childhood learning. It has specific implications for the design of digital toys and, because there has been little prior research in this area, it is timely both for its analysis and for laying the foundations for future reasearch into areas beyond the specific toys and software used in this study to the general design of tangible interfaces for learning technologies. It has been widely disseminated in the UK and abroad to audiences ranging from early childhood practicioners to academics. Details of CACHET have been circulated to 57 toy companies in the UK, and one of the results of this has been the establishment of an on-going relationship with Leapfrog Toys UK.

The aims of the study were three-fold:-

• To construct a descriptive framework of interaction and mediation engendered by digital toys in formal and informal educational contexts
• To contribute to the development of methodologies and analytical tools for research into interactivity beyond the desktop
• To inform the design of digital toys.

The toys chosen as the focus of this research can be used on a stand-alone basis or in conjunction with a computer and so provided scope for examining children's responses to multiple interfaces on an exploratory basis. They appear like traditional soft toys but have a vocabulary of about 4000 words, motors to provide movement and a ROM chip so they respond to inputs such as the hand, toe or ear being squeezed. Produced by Microsoft and marketed as Actimates, the toys have now been withdrawn from the market because the costs of R&D made them too dear. Although there has been a marked increase in the availability of other 'smart' toys during the lifetime of this study, the particular functionality of the Actimates has not been replicated.

Targeted at children ages four to eight, the toys are based on Arthur and his sister DW, two aardvark characters from the Marc Brown stories. On a stand-alone basis the toys ask questions and suggest games. Playing simultaneously with the toy and the compatible CD-ROMs that feature language and number games requires a 'PC pack' accessory consisting of a radio transmitter that connects to the computer's game port. This increases the toy's vocabulary to 10,000 words, enabling it to comment on the child's interaction with the software and to offer advice and encouragement. In this mode, the child does not interact solely with the computer but also interacts with the toy which, in turn, interacts with the computer and mediates the child's actions. If the child plays with a partner the interaction possibilities are multiplied.

Whilst engaged in the software activities, children are able to elicit help from the toy by squeezing its ear. If the toy is not present, the help and information are provided by a clickable on-screen icon of Arthur or DW. If children have difficulty with a game, or persist in making the same mistake, the toy or icon reminds them of this. This provision of the same help content delivered through different mechanisms was central to our interest in these toys.

Data Collection:

A common core of data collection methods was employed, comparing use of the toy alone, the software alone and the two used in conjunction across all sites. This was supplemented with methods that were suitable for the different conditions in specific locations - homes, after school clubs and classrooms.

Researchers adopted both a controlled approach with detailed, dual-source video analysis and a semi-naturalistic approach using video, diaries and interviews. The Wechsler Pre-School and Primary Intelligence Scales - Revised (WPPSI-R), were used across all sites to provide data on verbal and non-verbal skills and the Pre-school Play behaviour Scale (PPBS) was used in the after school clubs and the classroom. Children taking part in the at home studies were visited three times over a period of approximately two weeks (beginning, midway and end). Twelve children (six girls and six boys, average age of 6:2) were involved, either receiving the toy and then the software or the software and then the toy, with all children having both items for the second week. Parents completed a diary over the two weeks to provide background information and data on use of the toy/software in the researcher's absence. Video recordings were made on an opportunistic basis.

Fieldwork in the four after school clubs was similar to that conducted in the school inasmuch as children used the items for fixed times, were observed once and the playleaders completed a PPBS. Twenty-two children (nine girls and 13 boys, average age of 5:5) participated in the sessions which were an average of thirty minutes in duration. Children used the toy/software individually or as pairs and, as in the homebased studies, children were introduced to either the toy or the software first.

A more controlled approach was adopted in the classroom, with detailed, dual-source video analysis of 32 children (16 girls, 16 boys) with an average age of 4:7. Children were observed on single visits and spent about twenty minutes playing with the toy on its own followed by an average of forty minutes playing with the software, either with or without the toy. Both sessions were recorded on video. The teacher completed a PPBS for each child and parents provided data on home computer use and the child's favourite software and toys. All children were given verbal instructions on using the software and received a demonstration of how to access the help facility. At the school and after school clubs the researcher's role was to remain in the background but to prompt activity when children were stuck.

All of the data relating to the individual children in the homes and individuals or pairs in the after school clubs were compiled to produce separate case studies. This enabled analysis of data for individuals and across children and to build up a detailed picture including context of use, individual differences, patterns of play and use of the toy and software.

Results:

Although parents found the ways in which the toy and the software interacted to be an impressive feature, children seemed to take it for granted. In homes, the time spent playing with the toy or the software decreased as the novelty value diminished, although interest in the toy wore off faster. The software had more lasting appeal whether the toy was used with it or not. If the toy was introduced after the software, the toy was played with infrequently, if at all, partly because the help features were not generally needed - the software had already been explored. However, in this sequence it was also the case that the toy was mostly seen as an adjunct to the software and rarely played with away from the PC.

Marketing strategies for the toys from Microsoft had included claiming educational value for them, with each of them being described on the box as an 'interactive learning partner'. The study did not measure learning gain but some measures for the standard proxies for learning, such as engagement, motivation and time on task, are available from the diaries and interviews. Based on these, it is unlikely that any short-term learning gain would be sustained, as interest in the toy diminished over a relatively short period.

While initially intriguing, the toy's vocabulary presents only an illusion of reciprocity and appears to be too limited for the necessary suspension of disbelief for a child to imply personality. Most children found that the talking became monotonous or irritating, preferring to switch it off. The home study children were older than those in other contexts and this may account for parents' comments on how quickly children's interest in the toy had waned or that the toy had proved more popular with a younger sibling (although all were well within Microsoft's suggested age range).

Detailed video analysis revealed that young children are able to make the connection between two different interfaces and co-ordinate the experience they receive through their convergence, including those who gained low scores on the WPPSI-R tests. Our evidence suggests that children as young as four are not disconcerted when faced with feedback and interaction possibilities from different artefacts. Many children did, however, require assistance from the researcher or a peer in order to elicit help from the toy or on-screen icon and there were examples of children ignoring the help provided by Arthur or DW. The children in the study were able to understand the mechanics of the toy interface and all could engage at an operational level (eg mouse control and the relationship between the mouse and the on-screen cursor). However, whether with the toy on its own or in combination with the software, not all children engaged in activities at the conceptual level. Unlike adults (Fogg & Nass, 1997), they are not taken in by the constantly positive and flattering feedback and even if they take notice of the help prompts, they do not necessarily interpret them correctly.

The results from the teacher's assessments (PPBS) confirm the traditional view that girls spend less time using the class PC and less time trying to work out how things work However, the girls showed the toy more affection and responded more appropriately to the toy's help prompts. From the classroom data we can see that the girls spent more time using the software when the toy was present; conversely, the boys spent more time when the toy was not present.

The technology also allows peers simultaneous access to interactions with the content and activities in a way that the standard desktop computer does not. Both children can interact with the software, one via the toy and the other via the keyboard or mouse, whereas children operating the PC by themselves are often so absorbed in the software that they pay little or no attention to the toy. However, when pairs use the toy and software together, successful interaction depends on both children working together as a team. The mouse clicks override the toy's sensors and if this is not recognised, the child controlling the toy can become frustrated and bored.

The role of the toy in supporting the child's learning was analysed in terms of scaffolding, a term coined by Wood et al. (1976) to account for how a more knowledgeable partner can assist the cognitive development of a less able one and gradually foster the development of successful independent task performance. This study extended the existing research by examining the ways in which children requested and used assistance from the toy, the accompanying software, or other people (Luckin et al., under review and 2003, forthcoming).

From this it will be possible to construct an understanding of children's use of the help available to them. The children in this study were more likely to seek help initially from human companions: a parent, the researcher or a fellow peer. In fact, they often failed to notice or process the unsolicited clues being given by the toy or the onscreen icon but if prompted by their human companion they became competent at using the toy to elicit hints and encouragement. The children were discerning users and recognised that the usefulness of the content in the available help was questionable.

Ineffective or irritating feedback from the toy, particularly wholesale praise and flattery, was not welcomed and on some occasions became a source of irritation and a distraction, particularly for children with high WPPSI-R scores.

One of the games which appeared to provide the impetus for children to engage with the help available was a searching game in which the tasks asked of the child were often discrete and offered a clear goal. When the toy was present, t-tests showed that there were statistically significantly more incidences of children successfully implementing the help they were offered. There was almost no difference between the toy and the no-toy condition in the number of times children refused or ignored the help offered.

This increase in social interactions around technology contradicts the popular belief that technology leads to reduced socialisation. It suggests that system developers interested in creating a Zone of Proximal Development between less and more able learners through software scaffolding might reap benefits from considering tangible, as opposed to screen-based, interfaces. The content of the feedback available through the onscreen icon and that available through the toy is the same; the method by which this feedback is invoked and delivered is different.

The future of interface contingency may lie in a system with alternative interfaces from which an assistant selects the most appropriate for a required intervention. Recognising interface contingency would represent another case of seeing if human teaching strategies are amenable to computer-based assistance.

All children seemed to enjoy the software, regardless of ability or age, but the low level of interest in the toy appeared to be age-related: parents reported much more interest in the toy from younger siblings. These toys are not impressive as interaction partners because the quality of the feedback is poor, often leading to frustration and irritation.

Nevertheless, the technology has potential and generalising from findings relating to the specific toys in the study suggests the following areas for future development.

• The type and mode of feedback could be improved by using existing work on software scaffolding to link it to the children's performance.
• As the children in the study were more likely to interact with each other or with the researcher when the toy was present, tangible interfaces are a promising way of improving interaction between collaborating peers around technology.
• Some of the toy's functionality was not discovered by children or their families (eg using it as an alarm clock). There is a trade-off between a toy being complex enough to maintain interest but simple enough for very young children to use.
• In pre-school settings and the early years of primary school the computer is usually seen as a free play activity (Plowman & Stephen, 2003b) and children use it without the benefit of adult mediation. There may be value in developing this technology for such circumstances but this would require close analysis of the contingent help that adults can provide and the plausibility issue would need to be overcome.
• The attraction of the toy for girls may provide an avenue for redressing an imbalance in the appeal of technology for boys and girls.