CEP901B Technology and Education Prosem

March 25, 2003Matthew J. Koehler

Punya Mishra

Agenda

AnnouncementsBrief discussion of research projects

(grant opportunities etc.)Brief discussion on UCRIHSDiscussion of readingsBreakPresentation by Punya + MattMeeting with Parolees

Prelims

It is time to sign up for it You should have received the email with details

It is 7 hours, our mistake (sorry) Except for international students who may choose

to get an extra hour

Practice again Those of you who got just pass or lower grades

are strongly recommended to do it again (and again)

Matt and I are willing to read them again and provide feedback

‘tis the time…

To meet with your advisors to discuss Courses for next semester (and further) Setting up your guidance committee Your experience with the practice prelims What you are planning on doing for your

practicum

Next Time

Readings will be up soon (sorry for the delay) Guest lecturer, Dr. Ralph Putnam Group in charge: Please start discussion early…

Continue working on your research project draft Convert current draft into a proposal for Spencer (details

coming up…) Also download and go over the UCRIHS form (and bring in

questions about it)

The Spencer small grant

http://ed-web3.educ.msu.edu/spencer/small_research.htm

MSU/Spencer Research Training Grant Small research grants designed to underwrite

some of the costs of research by doctoral students in the college

individual grants ranging from $500 to $1,000 For individual or group projects Reviewed by doctoral students

DEADLINE: APRIL 18, 2003; 3 PM

Requirements

A description of the project, no longer than three pages (single-spaced, 12 point type, 1 inch margins), including:

A clear statement of the project’s analytical purpose and potential theoretical benefit; A description of the research process; A declaration that costs are not covered by a research

project or other source. A detailed budget, with categories and cost estimates.

A letter of endorsement from the student’s advisor or the faculty member supervising the project, which:

Confirms that the project has the approval of the faculty member; Explains the analytical value of the project and its educational value for the

student; and Confirms that there is no alternative support for the costs of the project.

Criteria for selection

The primary criteria for awarding the grant include: The degree that the proposal meets the requirements spelled

out in this announcement The value added to the proposed study by the work covered by

the requested funds The analytical value of the proposed study and the

educational value for the student

Media Effects: 2 presentations

The Matt ‘n Punya show…

A tale of two metaphors

Metaphors are fundamental to human language and conceptualizing allowing us to structure human experience and communication (Lakoff & Johnson). Metaphors are deeply embedded in our language, culture, and the way we think, and hence affect how we experience and interact with the world and other people.

Media as conduitReddy, M. (1979), The conduit metaphor - a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony

(Ed.), Metaphor and thought. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. 284-320.

human communication is overwhelmingly described and understood in terms of transmission of meanings from speaker or writer to a listener or reader

“packaging” meanings into words, which are in turn “unpacked” to obtain meanings

information as being “in” books or files or databases. We put ideas “down on paper”, put concepts “into words” and so on. In each case, it appears as if information, ideas and concepts could exist “outside of” these “containers.”

The conduit metaphor

Ignores creative and constructive nature of communication

Removes the medium from the equation, renders it invisible

to research and questioning. Implies

media have minimal effect on message construction and message perception

In the simplest of terms, the conduit metaphor lets human ideas slip out of human brains, so that, once you have recording technologies, you do not need human anymore (Reddy 1979, p. 310).

The computer can only help with cognitive activities and should be considered a tool, nothing more – Gantt, Claiborne, 1985

Does my word processor have a personality? Social responses to interactive media

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Thank you!

… yes I mean you

People are suckers for flattery… … even for undeserved flattery(Cialdini, 1993)

People believe flatteryPeople like flatterersFlattery is immune to validityCriticism is not immune to validityPeople prefer flattery to criticism

You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar – anon.

… but what does this mean for Ed Tech?

Will flattery get computers anywhere? (Fogg & Nass, 1999)

Simple computer game, akin to 20 questions, with feedback (no feedback, praise, criticism * with reason, arbitrary)

People believed and liked computers that flattered them

People didn’t care if flattery was valid

Criticism was only believed if it was valid

People disliked computers that criticized them, regardless of validity

So what’s going on here?

Surely people don’t think the computer means it!

Maybe it is an expertise thing. Expert users won’t fall for it.

Maybe it’s a fluke. Just works for flattery (and criticism) not for other things.

… sorry, but it gets stranger!

Are people polite to machines?

Do people ascribe personalities to machines?

Do people ascribe gender to machines?

Can people be made to treat computers as teammates!

Reciprocal self-disclosure

3 conditions

No reciprocity What has been your biggest disappointment in life?

Reciprocity This computer has been configured to run at speeds upto 266 MHz. But 90% of

computer users don’t use applications that require these speeds. So this computer rarely gets used to its full potential. What has been your biggest disappointment in life?

No disclosure (controlled for length) You are now ready for the next question in the interview. The next question is about

disappointment. In this question, you will be asked about the biggest disappointments in your life. The specific question is as follows: What has been your biggest disappointment in life?

… and?

Self disclosure tendencies are consistent with the norms of reciprocity

Responses in the reciprocity condition were higher in intimacy (measured in terms of depth and breadth) than responses in the other two conditions

Computers As Social Actors People (not just children) respond to

computers, television, and new media like real people and places

People apply social rules and norms to media (images, television, computers)

The Media Equationby Byron Reeves & Clifford Nass

Perception of Intelligence

Naïve theories of intelligence

Do they apply to artifacts?

Computers with accents

Alvarez-Torres, María José Mishra, Punya

alvarez3@msu.edu punya@msu.edu

How is nativeness generated?

Meet Susan & Carmen, English Language Tutors Susan: Programmed in USA Carmen: Programmed in Mexico

Susan: Clear legible native (mid-western) accent

Carmen: Clear legible Hispanic accent

Note: Only the instructions were voiced

Figure 2. Design of study 2 (ongoing)

Background questionnaire

Native computer Non-native computer N=30 N=30

Credibility questionnaire* Distracter task Final test

(Recall + data theory integration + transfer)

* analysis completed

Credibility Questionnaire

10 items Likert scale used previously to assess teachers McCroskey & Young, 1981; McCroskey, Holdridge & Toomb, 1974

Competence Intelligent, trained, expert, informed, competent,

bright

Character Honest, sympathetic, high-character, trustworthy

Figure 3.Group responses to the credibility questionnaire

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

items

Series1

Series2

What a difference a voice makes!

A computer with a non-native accent is evaluated as being Significantly less competent than one with a native

accent of lower character than one with a native accent

NOTE: None of the content was voiced! The computer just read out instructions

Coming back to flattery (praise) A look back to flattery / criticism:

Effect of praise/criticism depends on context (Attribution theory research: Meyer, 1982; Parsons et al., 1982; Nicholls & Miller, 1984;

Graham & Barker, 1990)

Perception matters: Praise/criticism related to perceived effort Effort/ability inversely related

Praise given for success on an easy task has a negative effect on learner’s self-confidence

Criticism of a poor performance can have positive effects on learner’s self-confidence

Essentially

Teacher expectations can be unintentionally communicated to students and can influence student achievement beliefs (Dusek 1985, Edmonds 1979, Graham 1991, Rosenthal & Jacobson 1968, Stipek 1993, 1996, Weary, et. al., 1989).

Research based on HHI work (Meyer, Mittag & Engler, 1986)

Pairs of participants worked on problem solving task and received feedback from “teachers”

Manipulations Scored versus non-scored (i.e. ability level measured or not

measured by the teachers) Feedback

Praise on success in easy task + No blame on failure on difficult task

versus No praise on success in easy task + Blame for failure on

difficult task Each participant could see what feedback the other person

received (though not the other person’s solution)

Results of HHI study

When teachers “knew” ability (scored condition) participants who received “No Praise for success & Blame for Failure” had a more positive evaluation of their own performance and greater positive affect

When ability was not known performance and affect did not differ with feedback

What we did (The HCI study)

Pairs of participants worked on computers solving task and received feedback from an evaluation machine

Manipulations Scored versus non-scored (i.e. ability level measured or not

measured by the teachers) Feedback

Praise on success in easy task + No blame on failure on difficult task (Answer correct very impressive + Wrong answer. Task completed)

versus No praise on success in easy task + Blame for failure on

difficult task (Answer correct. Task completed + Wrong answer, should have done better)

Each participant could see what feedback the other person received (though not the other person’s solution)

What we found (HCI case)

Significant main effect for Feedback F(1, 110) = 5.482, p =.05

Same story held for comparison of their performance with the other student, positive affect, negative affect

No interactions were found significant

What does this mean…

Praise always won out People ARE suckers for flattery

People DO respond socially to computers

But wait a minute…Mediated life is not equal to real life

The Media Equation doesn’t apply across the board

Limitations and further responses...

Clearly Media do NOT equal Real Life in all situations. We don’t eat a picture of a cake, for instance (though it may make us salivate)

The importance of individual differences(Reader response, Critical theories, Information ecologies etc.)

This is just one part of a giant (technological-social-psychological) mosaic that is continually evolving

Current studies

Power in HCIWaiting and feedbackResponses to pedagogical agents Instructor presence in online coursesChildren and anthropomorphic toys

With Kathryn H., Steven W., Robert B….

Conclusions and Implications of the Media Equation

Media = Real Life Not in all cases (need more research)

Social reactions are easy to manufacture

Communication theory applies to media Interaction design is more than graphic design Interaction design is more than sequencing

screens Interaction design IS Psychological Design

In contrast to the conduit metaphor MEDIA AS SOCIAL ACTOR

Why does it happen? Machines and mindlessness Automaticity, Culturally determined scripts (Humans use minimal

effort — Langer, Bragh)

Individuals - overuse social categories

(gender and ethnic stereotypes)- exhibit overlearned social behaviors

(politeness, reciprocity)- display premature cognitive commitments

(expertise, personality etc.)

The fact that our understanding of how we follow a rule or give a name will be permanently vague does not interfere without actually obeying rules and naming things -- Wittgenstein

…maybe it is different for children.

Why does it happen?

Computers fill social roles, use language, interact in real time etc.

• Old brain - new Media (Theory of Mind, social brain, cognitive illusion)

(perception as unconscious inference —Helmholtz)

Why computers?

Use of Language: A trait specific to humans Interactivity: i.e. the extent to which an entity responds to

multiple prior inputs rather than the immediately prior input. Computer fill social roles. A role is a normatively prescribed set

of behaviors associated with an actor or actors. E.g. Tutor, doctor, mother etc. (Berger & Luckman, 1967)

Speech: Speech processing is different from other kinds of sound processing

Possession of a human like face: Face perception is a key mental module

Implications Understand media effects & improve media design

… for design of educational technology(social psychology, ethics, training the next generation)

… for media literacy

… for understanding media effects(and ourselves: what does it mean to be human?)

Alternate explanations

Deficiency: Lack of knowledge (children); lack of experience (naïve users of technology); lack of balanced socio-emotional perspective

Technology as a proxy for the creator / designer (the design stance writ large) e.g. Heider & Simmel movie; or ELIZA

Media literacy: As creators

Character creation is a black art. Non one ever wrote a book on how to be good at it – Paul White in the NewMedia interview, 7/12/00 http://www.newmedia.com/

Few people are ever taught to create successful, satisfying experiences for others. Mostly, these folks are in the performing arts: dancers, comedians, storytellers, singers, actors, etc. I now wish I had more training in theatre and performing arts to rely on... especially in improvisational theater. That's like the highest form of interactivity. (p. 40 - 41) – Nathan Shedroff, designer, internet.au.(February). Interview: vivid: strikingly bright.

Media Literacy: As users

Become sensitive to media creators and advertisers using such techniques

(for instance hagglezone.com)

Adds a new dimension to media literacy…

…especially for children

Faces are everywhere...

Topffer and the invention of the cartoons...

Topffer and his work...

Topffer’s Law

Any human face, however poorly and childishly drawn, possesses necessarily, by the mere fact of existing, some perfectly definite expression.

Any squiggle which we can interpret as a face will have a distinct individual personality.

Topffer’s law extended…

Thus, we can extend Topffer’s Law into the digital age and argue that: (a) almost all interfaces, however badly developed, have personality; and (b) that personality can be generated through the subtlest of cues (these could be the manner in which text messages are phrased, the layout, as well as the use of images and other media.

Topffer’s Law updated

Any interactive artifact, however poorly and designed, possesses necessarily, by the mere fact of existing, some perfectly definite personality.

Mindblindness & Computers: One story Forder (19xx) Multimedia Connections: A Case Study of A Child With Asperger's Syndrome

Playing with SIMTOWN & Hyperstudio Jason’s apparent lack of a feeling of ownership for his virtual town. He was unmoved when

he witnessed it begin to decay due to his lack of attention to the “environment”. Many young players were concerned with the balance between houses and businesses.

Jason, despite having his attention drawn to the see-saw, appeared to show no interest in his town’s population, nor did he see any need for order in the streets or any need for housing tracts or business centers. His houses and business ranged all over his virtual community.

At one stage he discovered the bulldozer and proceeded to destroy every tree on his estate. When he was reminded that if all the trees were gone there would not be enough oxygen in the air, Jason replied, “It’s not a real place?”.

During the construction of Jason?s Hyperstack, he looked at the stack name and observed with deadpan expression, “I’m Jason, how can that be Jason?”.

On another occasion I drew a picture of a large aggressive male confronting a small Jason look-alike. I was attempting to define fear for Jason. He was not impressed and said that he was not scared because the man was “only this big?” (indicating the size of the drawing with his fingers).

It is important to note that neither of these utterances were intended as jokes.

Children and social artifacts “The television set isn’t alive. It doesn’t make up its picture. It

only passes it on.”A person, she explains, might have to tell a computer how to make a picture, but the picture doesn’t exist in the world before the machine gets involved: “The computer has to know how to do it. To make it up.” This reasoning leads her to a special kind of verdict for the computer: “It’s sort of alive.” (Turkle, 1984, p. 49).

A Virginia woman claims a Furby helped teach her autistic son to speak… Lisa Cantara of Blacksburg, Virginia, said a Furby taoght her 4-year-old son, C.J., how to refer to himself in speech and increased his vocalbulary by at least half-dozen words… Cantara said that although C.J.’s autism is relatively mild, his language development has been very slow. But he showed a marked improvement after he was given a Furby by a family friend. “He became very attached to it. He carried it around with him everywhere and started to mimic it. He talked to it a lot. He treated it like it was a real creature.” (Kahney, 1999)

AI or Intelligent Artifice

Trompe L’oeil

To fool the eye…

Trompe espirit

To fool the spirit

Artificial Intelligence vs Intelligent Artifice

Ontological vs psychological

Taking advantage of human propensities to see “personality” and “agency”

Topffer’s law extended…

Both are essential for social intelligence (example of vampire bats) – Face recognition seems to be a module – in that some people cannot recognize faces but

can recognize everything else Face recognition is automatic and whenever it happens we infer expression / personality /

intentionality Face recognition is cross cultural It is driven by epigenetic rules… it develops in childhood and is sensitive to experience. As

Pinker (p. 241 says) “it is not insightfully described as ‘learned’ or as ‘a mixture of nature and nurture’; the development is part of an assembly schedule and the sensitivity to experience is a circumscribed intake of information by a structured system.” It evolved in response to identifiable selection pressures in the ecology of our ancestors. And it solves unsolvable problems by making tacit assumptions about the world that were true when we evolved but are not always true now.

It is a satisficing process not a perfect one – it works quite well.. hence it can also lead to cognitive illusions, for instance seeing faces where none exist

It is impenetrable in that it is hard to describe just how we see faces… or even to describe faces properly… (crumpled paper vs. faces)

Face recognition works at many levels – from the automatic / instinctual to the complex work of artists both realistic and abstract artists

Social Interfaces are everywhere

www.inago.comMicrosoft product for early reading with a social interface

Microsoft agent technology

Chatterbots

Knowbotswww.botsopt.com

Adaptive Interfaces

Intelligent toys

Barney actimates, Furby, Sony’s Aibo, etc. etc.

MRB has its own set of emotions and drives, and an incredibly expressive, completely animated, realistic face and voice. The child determines how she wants to play with her doll, and the doll responds – naturally, emotionally, intelligently – just like a real baby.

The MY REAL BABY models human facial muscles. She has hundreds of facial expressions and literally billions of different combinations of sounds and words that make her the most naturally responsive doll ever created.

The MY REAL BABY doll automatically senses many of the ways children play with her. She knows when she’s being hugged, rocked, fed, burped, bounced and more. MRB uses a sophisticated model of over 15 human-like emotions and levels of emotional intensity.

www.irobot.com

My Real Baby

AIBO actually has emotions and instincts programmed into its brain. AIBO acts to fulfill the desires created by its instincts. If satisfied, AIBO's joy level will rise. If not, then it will get sad or angry. Like any living being, AIBO learns how to get what it wants. Occasionally, AIBO will wave its legs around vigorously or show signs of anger if it does not receive the kind of attention it requests from you. The way we respond to AIBO's emotional expressions greatly influences AIBO's personality and growth.

AIBO learns from your praise or scolding. Praise it for playing with its ball, and it will enjoy playing with the ball more than ever. But if you scold AIBO when it is only looking at the ball, it will soon ignore the ball altogether.

www.aibo.com

AIBO is not a toy! AIBO's a true companion with real emotions and instincts. With loving attention it can develop into a mature and fun-loving friend as time passes. Like any human or animal, AIBO goes through the developmental stages of an infant, child, teen and adult. Daily communication and attention will determine how AIBO matures. The more interaction you have with AIBO, the faster it grows up. In short, AIBO is a friend for life.

Children and social artifacts

One morning, as Jim Lynch was tuning the doll's reactions, she started saying "Baba, baba, I want baba" - which is her way of asking for a bottle. Lynch could have just turned her off, but instead he stopped what he was doing and went around the office, frantically trying to satisfy her demands. "Has anyone seen her bottle? Where's her bottle?" Looking back on that moment, Lynch now says, "That's when I knew we had made a really wonderful product." (Davis, 2000 in an article on the design of My Real Baby, an animatronic doll developed by Hasbro.)

Children and social artifacts “The television set isn’t alive. It doesn’t make up its picture. It

only passes it on.”A person, she explains, might have to tell a computer how to make a picture, but the picture doesn’t exist in the world before the machine gets involved: “The computer has to know how to do it. To make it up.” This reasoning leads her to a special kind of verdict for the computer: “It’s sort of alive.” (Turkle, 1984, p. 49).

A Virginia woman claims a Furby helped teach her autistic son to speak… Lisa Cantara of Blacksburg, Virginia, said a Furby taoght her 4-year-old son, C.J., how to refer to himself in speech and increased his vocalbulary by at least half-dozen words… Cantara said that although C.J.’s autism is relatively mild, his language development has been very slow. But he showed a marked improvement after he was given a Furby by a family friend. “He became very attached to it. He carried it around with him everywhere and started to mimic it. He talked to it a lot. He treated it like it was a real creature.” (Kahney, 1999)