Acknowledgement
이 논문은 2022년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 인문사회분야 신진연구자지원사업의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2022S1A5A8052607).
References
- 교육부 (2020. 11). 인공지능시대 교육정책방향과 핵심과제: 대한민국 미래교육이 나아가야 할 길. https://www.moe.go.kr/boardCnts/viewRenew.do?boardID=294&boardSeq=82674&lev=0&searchType=null&statusYN=W&page=1&s=moe&m=020402&opType=N에서 2022년 6월 8일 인출
- 김경철, 이고은 (2013). 교사보조로봇을 활용한 활동이 유아의 사회적 능력에 미치는 영향. 한국유아교육연구, 15(2), 29-49.
- 김민경, 이순형, 이동훈 (2018). 범주 경계선적 대상에 대한 유아의 생명현상 이해. 인간발달연구, 25(1), 169-194. https://doi.org/10.15284/kjhd.2018.25.1.169
- 김수환, 김성훈, 이민정, 김현철 (2020). K-12 학생 및 교사를 위한 인공지능 교육에 대한 고찰. 컴퓨터교육학회논문지, 23(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.32431/kace.2020.23.4.001
- 유구종, 이정순 (2013). 지능형로봇 활용 프로그램의 사회.정서 관련측면에서의 효과. 유아교육연구, 33(2), 393-425. https://doi.org/10.18023/KJECE.2013.33.2.018
- 이보람, 안혜령, 조우미 (2022). 인간형 인공지능 로봇 활용에 대한 유아교사의 인식과 요구분석. 인간발달연구, 29(3), 181-210. https://doi.org/10.15284/kjhd.2022.29.3.181
- 이하원, 이미숙, 신원애 (2020). 개정 누리과정 사회관계영역 중심 로봇 놀이활동 「ROBO - RANG」이 유아의 사회적 능력과 정서능력에 미치는 영향. 어린이미디어연구, 19(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.21183/kjcm.2020.03.19.1.1
- 임지명, 최연철 (2022). 유아 대상 인공지능교육의 방향 모색. 유아교육연구, 42(4), 273-296. https://doi.org/10.18023/kjece.2022.42.4.011
- 천희영 (2015). 만4세 유아의 스마트폰 이용 정도와 발달특성, 생활시간 간의 관계 및 이용 정도예측변인. 한국보육지원학회지, 11(6), 153-175. https://doi.org/10.14698/jkcce.2015.11.153
- 천희영, 박소연 (2020). STEAM교육 접근에 의한 언플러그드 로봇 놀이프로그램이 유아의 창의적및 사회적 인성 함양에 미치는 효과. 한국보육지원학회지, 16(5), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.14698/jkcce.2020.16.05.001
- 하수연, 이성애 (2012). 교사보조 인간형 로봇의 외형에 대한 만4세 유아 선호도 연구. 한국보육지원학회지, 8(5), 89-110.
- 현은자, 손수련 (2011). 로봇은 살아 있을까? : 우리 반 교사보조로봇에 대한 유아의 인식. 아동학회지, 32(4), 1-14.
- Ackermann, E. (2001). Piaget's constructivism, Papert's constructionism: What's the difference. Future of learning group publication, 5(3), 438-449.
- Bartneck, C., Kulic, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics, 1, 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
- Belpaeme, T., Kennedy, J., Ramachandran, A., Scassellati, B., & Tanaka, F. (2018). Social robots for education: A review. Science robotics, 3(21), eaat5954. https://doi.org/10.1126/ scirobotics.aat5954
- Berson, I. R., Luo, W., & Yang, W. (2022). Narrowing the digital divide in early childhood: Technological advances and curriculum reforms. Early Education and Development, 33(1), 183-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2022.1989740
- Burgsteiner, H., Kandlhofer, M., & Steinbauer, G. (2016). Irobot: Teaching the basics of artificial intelligence in high schools. Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, 30(1), 4126-4127. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v30i1.9864
- Chu, S. T., Hwang, G. J., & Tu, Y. F. (2022). Artificial intelligence-based robots in education: A systematic review of selected SSCI publications. Computers and education: Artificial intelligence, 100091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100091
- Dreyfus, H. L. (1992). What computers still can't do: A critique of artificial reason. MIT press.
- Druga, S., Vu, S. T., Likhith, E., & Qiu, T. (2019). Inclusive AI literacy for kids around the world. Proceedings of FabLearn 2019, 104-111. https://doi.org/10.1145/3311890.3311904
- Druga, S., Williams, R., Breazeal, C., & Resnick, M. (2017). "Hey Google is it ok if I eat you?" Initial explorations in child-agent interaction. Proceedings of the 2017 conference on interaction design and children, 595-600. https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.3084330
- Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological review, 114(4), 864-886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
- Gjersoe, N. L., Hall, E. L., & Hood, B. (2015). Children attribute mental lives to toys when they are emotionally attached to them. Cognitive Development, 34, 28-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2014.12.002
- Kahn, P. H., Jr., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Freier, N. G., Severson, R. L., Gill, B. T., Ruckert, J. H., & Shen, S. (2012). "Robovie, you'll have to go into the closet now": Children's social and moral relationships with a humanoid robot. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 303-314. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027033
- Kennedy, J., Baxter, P., & Belpaeme, T. (2015). Comparing robot embodiments in a guided discovery learning interaction with children. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7, 293-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0277-4
- Kewalramani, S., Kidman, G., & Palaiologou, I. (2021). Using Artificial Intelligence (AI)-interfaced robotic toys in early childhood settings: a case for children's inquiry literacy. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 29(5), 652-668. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2021.1968458
- Li, J. (2015). The benefit of being physically present: A survey of experimental works comparing copresent robots, telepresent robots and virtual agents. International Journal of HumanComputer Studies, 77, 23-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.01.001
- Lo, Y., Mendell, N. R., & Rubin, D. B. (2001). Testing the number of components in a normal mixture. Biometrika, 88(3), 767-778. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/88.3.767
- Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727
- Margett, T. E., & Witherington, D. C. (2011). The nature of preschoolers' concept of living and artificial objects. Child development, 82(6), 2067-2082. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01661.x
- Melson, G. F., Kahn Jr, P. H., Beck, A., Friedman, B., Roberts, T., Garrett, E., & Gill, B. T. (2009). Children's behavior toward and understanding of robotic and living dogs. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(2), 92-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.10.011
- Muthen, B., & Muthen, L. K. (2000). Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analysis: Growth mixure modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 24(6), 882-891. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000374-200006000-00020
- Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041
- Nigam, M. K., & Klahr, D. (2000). If robots make choices, are they alive?: Children's judgments of the animacy of intelligent artifacts. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 22. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6bw2h51d
- Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural equation modeling: A multidisciplinary Journal, 14(4), 535-569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396
- Peel, D., & McLachlan, G. J. (2000). Robust mixture modelling using the distribution. Statistics and Computing, 10, 339-348. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008981510081
- Rodriguez-Garcia, J. D., Moreno-Leon, J., Roman-Gonzalez, M., & Robles, G. (2020). Introducing artificial intelligence fundamentals with LearningML: Artificial intelligence made easy. Eighth international conference on technological ecosystems for enhancing multiculturality, 18-20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434780.3436705
- Saylor, M. M., Somanader, M., Levin, D. T., & Kawamura, K. (2010). How do young children deal with hybrids of living and non-living things: The case of humanoid robots. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 28(4), 835-851. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151009X481049
- Spatola, N., Kuhnlenz, B., & Cheng, G. (2021). Perception and evaluation in human-robot interaction: The Human-Robot Interaction Evaluation Scale (HRIES)-A multicomponent approach of anthropomorphism. International Journal of Social Robotics, 13(7), 1517-1539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00667-4
- Springer, K. (1992). Children's awareness of the biological implications of kinship. Child Development, 63(4), 950-959. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131246
- Sutherland, C. J. (2019). The Robots are the Same, the Children are Not. 2019 16th International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots (UR 2019), 254-258. https://doi.org/10.1109/URAI.2019.8768783
- Touretzky, D., Martin, F., Seehorn, D., Breazeal, C., & Posner, T. (2019). Special session: AI for K-12 guidelines initiative. Proceedings of the 50th ACM technical symposium on computer science education, 492-493. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287525
- Turkle, S., Taggart, W., Kidd, C. D., & Daste, O. (2006). Relational artifacts with children and elders: the complexities of cybercompanionship. Connection Science, 18(4), 347-361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540090600868912
- Wang, B., Rau, P. L. P., & Yuan, T. (2022). Measuring user competence in using artificial intelligence: validity and reliability of artificial intelligence literacy scale. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2072768
- Williams, R., Park, H. W., & Breazeal, C. (2019). A is for artificial intelligence: the impact of artificial intelligence activities on young children's perceptions of robots. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 447, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300677
- Yang, W. (2022). Artificial Intelligence education for young children: Why, what, and how in curriculum design and implementation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100061