Claims of "smart" toys go back decades. See Chatty Cathy and Furby . But generative artificial intelligence is increasing the capabilities of interactive toys. The company Curio , for instance, markets itself as a "magical workshop where toys come to life." Its plush toys like Gabbo or one modeled on the Italian brainrot character Ballerina Cappuccina have onboard AI models that let them talk to kids, remember their conversations and personalize responses. But we know little about how such toys affect kids and even how kids play with them.
Last summer, University of Washington researchers gathered eight kids on campus to explore such questions. The 6-11 year olds played with three Curio toys and reflected on the experience with KidsTeam UW , a group of researchers who work with kids to collaboratively design technologies.
The kids initially were curious, asking introductory questions, such as "What is your name?" and exploring how the toys work. Do they react when a kid tickles their toes? They do not, which proved a disappointment. Some features delighted the kids, like when a toy said its favorite number was seven. But the toys frequently couldn't respond well to more complex questions. It "didn't listen to me like 26 million times," one participant said. So they turned to antagonizing the toys, calling them "ugly" and "evil" and joking about throwing them in the ocean.
The team presented its research June 25 at the Interaction Design and Children conference in Brighton, United Kingdom.
"The juxtaposition of this plushie toy that also had signs of intelligence was both interesting and disturbing for the kids," said co-lead author Aayushi Dangol , who completed this research as a UW doctoral student in human centered design and engineering and is currently a researcher at Foundry10 . "If parents are considering buying these toys for children, they need to be aware that while the toys can be fun and relational and dynamic, they also come with possible harms. They'll give wrong answers, or flatter the kids excessively, or could manipulate the kids into attachment."
The eight kids came in for two sessions to play with the toys and then complete a "comicboarding" activity, where they filled in comic panels imagining what might happen next if they kept playing with the toys.
The study builds on KidsTeam's long-running vein of research looking at how kids respond to tech — exploring what makes a technology "creepy" and how smart kids actually think AI is .
"For as long as children have played with toys, they've imparted their imagination to the toy to make it move and talk," said co-author Jason Yip , a UW associate professor in the Information School and director of KidsTeam UW. "Now the script has been flipped and the toy has this imitation of imagination. We've never lived through that before, and we don't know what questions children will ask or how long they'll even want to play with these toys. So it's really important to give them opportunities to discuss these technologies we're handing down to them."
Co-authors include Meghan Gupta , a UW doctoral student in human centered design and engineering; Daeun Yoo , a UW doctoral student in the Information School; Robert Wolfe of Rutgers University, who completed this research as a UW doctoral student; Franziska Roesner , a UW professor in the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering; and Julie A. Kientz , UW professor and chair of human centered design and engineering.
This research was funded by the National Science Foundation, the Institute of Education Sciences, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Institute of Museum and Library Services.
