For your third blog engagement, please watch The Birth of a Word, a TED talk by Deb Roy, and then pen a paragraph or two in response.
The first thing you might want to discuss in your blog response is: how do you feel about the technology involved here? Do you find this to be intrusive? Is such observation fair for the child? What are the ethical ramifications of this type of study? Or you might wonder, what does this say about language acquisition? What did the technology "show" us that we might have missed before?
You might also discuss the "flow" of the study, how one idea, through the process of discovery, led to another idea and how "science" grows organically from one question to the next.
Or you might discuss the latter part of the TED episode, where social media enters in. What types of things could you do with that kind of data?
I am confident you will enjoy this episode, and I look forward to reading your comments!
Dr. White
The technology involved to capture video of the family as their child was growing learned language could be considered intrusive if they did not know they were being filmed (and the video was going to be studied). I believe it is a more accurate form of filming a home video (compared to traditional home videos where one person is holding a camcorder) because this way every moment of every day is being captured and not just selective moments.
ReplyDeleteAlso, being able to map out where certain words were said in a house and the frequency of them being said in certain areas can be used in understanding how a child learns language and what they associate with that word (ex. if "goodbye" is said near the front door, they might associate that with leaving, etc.).
I think the technology involved in this study is amazing. It is crazy to think that you could use video and audio footage to analyze your child's development and then use that information to piece together how your child learned how to do a certain action or say a certain word. I think this method is more helpful than intrusive because it allows parents to catch things that they never would have noticed and the footage doesn't have to be open to the public like the speaker did. Added to the fact that this same technology can be used for things like finding out why a pet favors one person over another even though both people are equally involved in its life or even use it to analyze arguments and pinpoint specific words, phrases, or tones that provoke hostility to help reduce stress in a family or relationship. This technology is amazing and could help improve many social interactions and learning experiences with little outside intrusion because you get to choose who sees the footage. My hope is that society can learn from and improve on this technology to create better world to live in through the analysis of people's interactions.
ReplyDeleteYou are a raging optimist, Kyle! I like that.
DeleteI think this is an interesting way to observe a child's language development, and that it provides good insight into the progression of a child's language development. I also think this is a good way to see how a child learns to adjust the sounds he/she makes and how those around him/her change the way they adjust their own habits or language in response to a child learning language. In regards to social media I think this a really good way to look at what topics are popular in a culture and what topics or issues are important. The bit about President Obama's State of the Union Address was really interesting to me because it shows how may people care about the political atmosphere and the hot issues in the country and then have a discussion about them. We could look at this and see what type of discussion people are having, are the favorable or unfavorable to what is being said and how issues are being handled by the government. With this we can see what the public would like to happen and if the public is supportive or not. ... This could be useful in a political campaign .. see what issues the public views as important and what they think about those issues.
ReplyDeleteAmber: This is very interesting. Think of the advantages our current "spy" programs, as revealed by Edward Snowden, could potentially give to an incumbent President...!
DeleteAs impressive as this technology may be, I think the video left out mentioning all of the time that went into this study. Not just the initial 3 years, but to analyze so much raw footage and pick out single words or phrases out of the whole mix is truly astounding. To go back over the past three years and think of all of the times and places I used a word as commonplace as water, to see that all condensed into a "wordscape" would probably put a massive peak at the boathouse I rowed at, but otherwise probably nowhere else. Because what if a similar study was done, but instead of an infant's speech being tracked, what if it were a teenager's? What other words would be measured instead? I'm sure the word "sorry" would leave a huge peak outside my parent's room for all of the times they called me in to scold me. Just like I'm sure "pizza" would come up with peaks in every room from all of the times my mom asked if we wanted pizza for dinner.
ReplyDeleteBut in my opinion, this study shouldn't be intrusive, and it sure seemed to be that they had all of their bases covered for privacy, and only a select few analysts were privy to the footage. This study was interesting, particularly the connection of what people say on Facebook connected to real life events. I know every time I would check my news feed, there'd be at least three posts about some "stupid football team, can't get any yards" or "omg did Snookie really say that?" To see those comments linked to the real world really shows a powerful connection to not just these events, but it really drives at the heart of what people are thinking and feeling. There are plenty of advertising firms out there that'd like to know what everybody likes.
The technology used starts with the video and sound recording on the ceiling. From there the data collected is studied and graphs are created to show the patterns between language, location, and other factors within the house. This showed all the patterns from a different view, opening up new possibilities to study language.
ReplyDeleteThis study could be considered intrusive if those within the house did not know they were being recorded. The family knew that they were recording in their house and I assume they told those who visited they were recording. I do not consider this intrusive because they agreed to it. In the video it is mentioned that there were precautions taken for the privacy of those within the video. This was a great opportunity to study how babies learn language and to understand the aspects within a home that affect their learning.
We know that social media plays a large part in our lives today. It has become this entity that teens and young adults have grown up with, and the older generations use it because it is becoming a norm within society. With this technology people could study how ideas are created from social media, and what actually becomes of those ideas.
I thought the technology used to capture the wordscapes was incredible. Having an audiovisual record of the language acquisition process is helpful in understanding language development. However, I do find this technology to be intrusive especially when it's used on such a large scale.
ReplyDeleteA lot of the data acquired with the technology can be acquired through observation and common sense. For instance, the word water was said the most in the kitchen and the word bye was said the most near the door. That advanced technology is not necessary to notice those trends.
Also, since everyone in the video other than Deb Roy's son was aware of being on camera. This means that all of the interactions with his son were not completely candid, which makes the data less credible. Ideally the data should be of people in their natural state who are unaware of being recorded, but this is kind of creepy and violates privacy or consent. The data is also skewed in that MIT is only monitoring data from television and publicly available information from social networking sites. As big as TV and Facebook is (especially in America), it is not the whole world or all the information out there. This data is a narrow piece of an extremely broad subject that they are trying to learn more about.
This technology enables us to learn more about language acquisition in a cultural setting as well as in a locative context. This is some of the most interesting research paralleling dynamics and language acquisition. Although it is interesting, I think researching the brain will give more insight into language acquisition and the data will be more credible.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that the technology used to create the word associations flaunted in the latter half of the video is particularly intrusive. Having your entire house lined with cameras that are going to be reviewed by students isn't an idea I would embrace, though I know some people who would love to have a security net like that. However, its ethicality is in a bit of a gray area for me. Referring to the cameras set up in Deb Roy's house, anybody that was in the house could see the cameras and could choose not to be on them by not being in the house...except for his son, who was essentially the focus of the study. He wouldn't have known what the cameras were and what they were doing so early in his life. It doesn't seem fair to the child that he's forced into these recordings. It's definitely legal within Mr. Roy's parental rights, but ethical? I don't believe so. Science and ethics tend to be opposite each other. If this research leads to a better understanding of how language is formed (Judging by those word association 3d models they presented, showing where words that the child learned were said most in the house, it may.), the process of getting there would seem more ethical in the near future. If nothing comes out of it that we don't already know, then why did Mr. Roy undertake such a monstrous recording? What is his son going to have to show for it? Then it would just seem cruel.
ReplyDeleteIn the same vein, anybody who uses social media knows that anybody can read what's there. Moreover, the companies providing means of communication (Twitter, Facebook, et cetera) have the right to take that information and make word associations of their very own. Those associations usually end up being sold to other companies and return as concentrated advertisements based on the interests you put up on social media. Theoretically, anyone could make the connections between media and social media that were presented...it just takes time, a lot of computing power, and the right program to scan and sort out words. Nobody seems to mind it, because they're warned about it and they can see the effects of it quite literally on their Facebook pages as ads become more relevant to them. If they weren't told their information was going to go through that process, it would be seen as ethical. There would be outrage over it, even after any results from it became relevant.
The cameras themselves are something I haven't seen before, and they are definitely an interesting way to go about researching how words are formed, but the basis of how we associate them in social media has been around...about as long as social media. When a company is sitting on servers and servers full of information, of course they're going to find a way to correlate them with events, topics, and anything they could use as leverage to make more money and keep afloat. Social media outlets have likely been doing that since MySpace was in style.
I deleted this comment earlier since it was formatted horribly. I'm definitely not using notepad again for this...
It seems to me that the ethical ramifications for completing this type of study is no more intrusive than a mother making a "first's" Scrapbook or home video collection. I think that it is perfectly fine to do this study. I would love to be that child being filmed. Even at five years old, he knew what was going on when he wondered if he could show his children the video. He could show them how he built his vocabulary.
ReplyDeleteI was also intrigued by the mapping of words said in the house and the location and movements of each person in the house. By monitoring these actions, you could see how certain words such as water are learned and where they are learned. Water had its highest peaks in the kitchen, where the nanny went to get him water to drink. The correlation between words and actions were mapped out very effectively by this study. I think that there is still more to come from these types of studies.
Hayden: This was pretty much my feeling about it. But when I presented this video to a class at a different school, one of my colleagues (a recent mother) expressed consternation over the child's right to privacy. Thus I put it to the class--and see that indeed, many agree that it was unfairly intrusive. I just thought it cool!
DeleteI agree with Hayden, I don't think they were intruding on the son's privacy. At least not anymore then other parents do. Parents already take a significant amount of pictures and videos without their child's approval. Also the child admitted to appreciating the videos and expressed a desire to keep them for many years, until his children could see them. I also agree with James, companies are already using the data collected from observing the connections between social media and mass media. Collecting or using that data is not intrusive. I don't think any part of this study was anymore intrusive then technology already is. Yet, it aloud these researchers to make connections that they had never made before, so I think the technology had a positive impact.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was very interesting to see this study explore both very specific ideas and very broad ideas. It changed from wanting to see how language was developed in a child, to how events effected that development, to the relationship between events and conversation. I wonder how they made the decision to change goals. Did they sit down and discuss it as a team? Was there any disagreements? If so how did they overcome them and move forward. It is interesting to see how team dynamics play a role in research. I would like to see a study on that.
I agree with Hayden, I don't think they were intruding on the son's privacy. At least not anymore then other parents do. Parents already take a significant amount of pictures and videos without their child's approval. Also the child admitted to appreciating the videos and expressed a desire to keep them for many years, until his children could see them. I also agree with James, companies are already using the data collected from observing the connections between social media and mass media. Collecting or using that data is not intrusive. I don't think any part of this study was anymore intrusive then technology already is. Yet, it aloud these researchers to make connections that they had never made before, so I think the technology had a positive impact.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was very interesting to see this study explore both very specific ideas and very broad ideas. It changed from wanting to see how language was developed in a child, to how events effected that development, to the relationship between events and conversation. I wonder how they made the decision to change goals. Did they sit down and discuss it as a team? Was there any disagreements? If so how did they overcome them and move forward. It is interesting to see how team dynamics play a role in research. I would like to see a study on that.
I feel that the technology involved in this study was not intrusive. Deb Roy was the one in charge of organizing this study and the installation of the equipment, so obviously he consented to being recorded. He presumably discussed this with his wife and the nanny before starting the experiment, and they must've given their permission. Children's consent isn't usually considered when setting up these kinds of experiments, and a newborn is not mentally developed enough to give consent anyway. Everyone involved with the recording was okay with the aims of the study, so it was ethical. The omnipresence of the recording might make it rather intrusive, but the fact that everyone involved willingly set it up separates it from something like NSA surveillance which is intrusive but nonconsentual (and therefore significantly less ethical).
ReplyDeleteThe second part of the study, in which television programs and tweets were mined for correlations, is also incredibly invasive. The content involved with the study, however, was willingly released into the public domain. This implies consent, as the creators of the content released it while fully aware that anyone could see their tweets at any time. Nothing private was included in the study, and so this part of the study was ethical overall. It was slightly shadier than something which surveyed explicitly consenting subjects (such as the first part of the study) but it was still ethically permissable.
I thought that the technology used in this video was very interesting. Although, it did make me uncomfortable to imagine what it would be like to be recorded in every room of your house for three years. I don't think that they were being invasive with their son's privacy. He was too young to understand it, and as Hayden and Nathan have pointed out, it is similar to what most parents do anyway. They record and photograph their children every chance they get.
ReplyDeleteEven though parts of this study made me a little bit uncomfortable, everyone involved gave consent and willingly participated. Because of this, I do not feel that it was intrusive. It was fascinating to see how his son's language developed over time. I have never seen something like that, and it was really interesting. I was also really impressed by the technology they used to trace patterns in where they were in the house and how they could follow the trails of where they had been at different times.
Using new technology to analyze language and making new pattern is absolutely a big help. Specially for the young generation that grow up with it. When you are involve in an action you dont notice every single effective element on the study but recording and several observations of a single action let the researchers to consider every aspect of it on their stuy. mapping of the location and moving of each person was an amazing project that could never been studied without these technologies.
ReplyDeleteDuring watching the talk I was saying "wow" constantly and at the end of the talk when he showed his son’s video I suddenly thought about how I learnt “wow”? because in my native language we use different expression instead of “wow” and living in the US caused me to say “wow” unconsciously when I am alone and watching a talk! Which could be different if I was not in American environment or even when I go back home and I am alone I do not use
English words as much I do here in my loneliness.
How cool that you were thinking "Wow!" and then the way the video concluded was with that very word. What do you think Roy was doing, really, when he concluded with his son's first step--and the word "Wow"? Was he being metaphoric, do you think, in ending with a child's first steps...? Or was it just a dad being a dad?
DeleteI thought the use of technology was very unique and clever. It made me think about learning language from a different angle. I think it was somewhat intrusive. Deb Roy and his team most likely had a prior plan and knew which words they wanted to target. Since "water" was the million dollar word, Deb probably forced it upon his child, which means the learning process wasn't natural. The technology that was developed brought new ideas/views to the table. For example, the "wordscapes" showed interaction of certain words with the rooms of the house. With further development, I feel that Deb's technology can be used to transcribe more than just the media. In the end, it can allow us to learn about more social interactions within our society.
ReplyDeleteThough ethics may come into question when installing cameras in every room of a home for research, the fact of the matter is, these memories, events would be lost otherwise. There will be physical evidence, memories of this child's first two years of life that would otherwise be lost or maybe documented through scattered family photos. Roy even says that his, now 5 year old, son understands that he will be able to keep these and show his own children one day; it has passed an invasion of privacy to a way of sharing intimate moments of their family life with generations to come.
ReplyDeleteRay's experiment has created visual representation of what I thought couldn't be made visual. I am very surprised with the extent that he went with the research to create the "word peaks" and the life "threads". As someone who finds visual representation a necessity, this gives me an even greater insight into the purpose of his research and what he was trying to accomplish. The images that were shown in the presentation were very eye opening; much better than any description. The connections between social media and people was very overwhelming; how small this world gets as social media expands.
I think this was very interesting to watch. Not only does technology get to experience something not done before, but the family always gets to see the transformation of their son's first few years transpire. This is truly something amazing, and as long as all of the family approved of this taking place in their home, and the nanny knowing she was constantly being recorded, then this is an amazing journey and experience for the whole family. I would love to have my life recorded.
ReplyDeleteNot only is this very cool for the child to see when they grow up, but the parents also get to see what happens in the home when they are not there. If they just happened to miss the child's first few steps, they could go back and re watch it on video.
Having this kind of technology in the home is such an amazing opportunity. To have connections with language through TV and the different adult role models with the child is a true experiment to be tested. Social media has a direct effect here and proven within this household. The child is learning through TV and mimicking what is being said. I thought it was also interesting to see which words were used in which rooms more or less often. Having the threads shown as a tool for the family and the technology based shows how the child is growing and becoming more proactive on his own.
I very much liked this experiment!
Immediately after viewing this video I asked myself how anyone could think this experiment is in any way ethically appropriate. First of all, the kid just had his entire development broadcasted to the world at an age where he most definitely couldn't conceptualize what was actually being given away. If that information ever got out the ways it could be used are endless. This kid could be completely fleshed out, aspects of his personality and tendencies that even he will never realize could be utilized by anyone with the means to analyze the vast amount of data.
ReplyDeleteIt should be noted that his experiment is essentially being carried out as we speak on all of us; although the information is being collected with a very different goal in mind. The NSA is collecting EVERYTHING. Phone calls, emails, text messages and social media posts are all collected and sent to massive date storage facilities that could do an analysis such as the one discussed in the video on every single one of us. Many people also aren't aware that it was recently revealed that the NSA has cracked internet encryption and can collect internet use data from anyone, anywhere in the world. As more and more cameras and audio recorders pop up in public places around the world, more and more information is being collected by the NSA, and the amount of power they have over the rest of the nation, and the world really, increases.
After considering the power the person who holds all this data has; I find myself wondering how data collection of this magnitude can ever be an ok thing to do. If the only thing the father has to show for compromising the security of his sons development is figuring out how the kid learned to speak, then I think as a society we need to realize that information collecting like this is never worth the risk we take when we record it.
This is the only reaction I have to this video, as anything else I have to say is relatively insignificant compared to the intensity of my concern about data collection.
Data collection is a serious concern, I think all of America can agree with you on that. And for the aspect of ethics: are you saying all studies with children under the age of 18 are unethical? And you feel that way because they can't sign or understand their rights?
DeleteHow are we supposed to understand ourselves and our growth if we can't study children?
I definitely understand the desire to study children, as their is much we can learn about ourselves and how we develop into adults. But since children simply cannot waive their rights, I do not approve of using data collected from observing them. A possible way of getting around this delicate issue is allowing studies to be performed on children, but only having the results published and revealed to the public after the child has come of age and gives consent. This may seem like an overcautious measure to take as most studies are not as invasive as Deb Roy's was, however I think it's the only way to ensure the preservation of the child's rights.
DeleteThe technology involved is not inherently good or bad. It is more the use of the product of this technology that could be problematic. There is a natural human tendency to want to observe, but also a tendency to want to change and perfect things to fit our versions of what a perfect world would be. As long as the videos are being used only for scientific research, it is no more harmful than a scrapbook, or regular home videos. Children are subjected to this kind of observation all the time, and it has become ingrained in our society. Only when one tries to use this technology to monitor behavior and check adherence to societal rules and laws does it become a problem. But for this instance, the debate over security versus privacy is not relevant since the lack of privacy was not for any gain in security.
ReplyDeleteLater in the video during the discussion of media, I think it shows a shift in our society and how we're communicating, even beyond what the video pointed out. Deb Roy and his team studied how mass media affects social media, but more and more, people are not consuming media through the TV, but rather through social media itself. Therefore, I think now social media is the most accurate depiction of the themes of conversation happening on a mass scale. And increasingly, social media is public and recordable enough that we can trace issues and the birth of new facets of culture so easily. Perhaps, though, this might be more problematic than the act of putting video camera's in a child's room as it is easier to influence through social media than it is to influence through observing through a video camera.
I had never heard of half of this technology before today. Putting timed video in vertical and horizontal way? "Tracking" the use of words while doing so? So interesting.
ReplyDeleteAs a caregiver this summer for a 2 year old girl, I watched her language and vocabulary increase in complexness and it was a fascinating ordeal. One word in particular "crab" was tough for her, but you know she could understand what it was, she just didn't have the right word for it. The word for crab was lost in her language vocabulary, and it was sometimes easier to get it out of her then other days. I wonder how this kind of technology could be used for a word less widely used in the household. Water is something that we all know, and we say that word maybe once a day, if not more. But how can we use this technology to track another word like crab? You don't see crabs at home, only at the beach. So, when we would go to the beach we would all point out a crab. How could this technology work outside the home? Can it be used to research how children learn vocabulary not pertaining to everyday life?
How does social media play into this technology? Maybe the word "crab" would be used differently in social media aspects then it would in a beach setting. Where do double meanings come into play when teaching a child language?
Very interesting TED talk, I really enjoyed it.
This video is very interesting and it's a very interesting study. From a scientific perspective, this is quite impressive. To have the technology to analyze and help understand such data is very cool. This study would not have been possible several years ago.
ReplyDeleteI thought that is was fascinating when Roy played the clip of his son first trying to pronounce the word water. As I heard the word "ga-ga" evolve, I was very excited. I also thought that it was very compelling when he said that his environment learned from him. I know that we discussed this in class the other day and I thought this was very interesting. When I initially thought of what he said, I thought that he got it wrong...that the child learned from his environment. But then when I thought about it a little more, it makes complete sense. I have many younger cousins and whenever you're trying to teach them a new word, you enunciate each word very slowly, slow enough so they might understand and soon repeat the word to the best of their ability.
On the other hand, I believe that the moral issue is very obvious. I believe that Roy was faced with some opposition while and after he conducted this study. At the end of the video when he was making his conclusion, it almost sounded like he was poking fun at the idea of asking his son for permission to conduct this research. And towards the end of the video, it appears that he is trying to justify that when his son replies ..."I can show this to my kids."
I love the idea of being able to capture and keep moments of the first years of a child's life -- ones that would otherwise be forgotten forever. The thought of having a camera constantly on me, however, does make me extremely uncomfortable. Of course it doesn't matter if it makes me uncomfortable since they were the ones being recorded. Still, as someone who is pretty private (and who sometimes gets a little creeped out by social media) I can't help but wonder how Deb Roy's son will feel about this when he is older. He may very well think that this is a great experiment and be glad that he was able to be a part of it, but I'm sure that when I was five-years-old I would've gone along with anything my parents did and think it was the greatest thing in the world. Now, however, I'd be absolutely horrified that everything I did from the time I was born until I was three was recorded, analyzed by scientists, and then put on the internet for all to see.
ReplyDelete