玩iPad長(zhǎng)大的一代怎樣學(xué)會(huì)交際和獨(dú)處？

玩iPad長(zhǎng)大的一代怎樣學(xué)會(huì)交際和獨(dú)處?

I recently watched my sister perform an act of magic.

最近，我目睹了姐姐表演魔術(shù)。

We were sitting in a restaurant, trying to have a conversation, but her children, 4-year-old Willow and 7-year-old Luca, would not stop fighting. The arguments — over a fork, or who had more water in a glass — were unrelenting.

我們坐在一家餐館里，試圖交談，可是她4歲的孩子薇洛(Willow)和7歲的孩子盧卡(Luca)不肯停止?fàn)巿?zhí)。他們不屈不撓地就一把叉子、以及誰(shuí)杯子里的水更多吵來(lái)吵去。

Like a magician quieting a group of children by pulling a rabbit out of a hat, my sister reached into her purse and produced two shiny Apple iPads, handing one to each child. Suddenly, the two were quiet. Eerily so. They sat playing games and watching videos, and we continued with our conversation.

就像從一頂帽子里拽出只兔子，讓一群孩子安靜下來(lái)的魔術(shù)師，我的姐姐把手伸進(jìn)手包，拿出兩個(gè)閃亮的蘋(píng)果iPad，給兩個(gè)孩子人手一個(gè)。他們突然就靜了下來(lái)。那場(chǎng)景非常詭異。他們坐著打游戲、看視頻，而我們則繼續(xù)交談。

After our meal, as we stuffed the iPads back into their magic storage bag, my sister felt slightly guilty.

吃完飯之后，我們把iPad放回神奇的儲(chǔ)存袋里，此時(shí)，我的姐姐感到有點(diǎn)內(nèi)疚。

“I don’t want to give them the iPads at the dinner table, but if it keeps them occupied for an hour so we can eat in peace, and more importantly not disturb other people in the restaurant, I often just hand it over,” she told me. Then she asked: “Do you think it’s bad for them? I do worry that it is setting them up to think it’s O.K. to use electronics at the dinner table in the future.”

“我不想在餐桌上給他們iPad，可是，假如它能讓他們?cè)谝粋€(gè)小時(shí)里心無(wú)旁騖，以便我們可以安靜地吃飯，更重要的是，假如它能避免他們打擾餐館里的其他人，那么我常常就會(huì)把iPad給他們。”她對(duì)我說(shuō)。然后她問(wèn)道，“你覺(jué)得這么做對(duì)他們有害嗎?我真的擔(dān)心，這會(huì)讓他們認(rèn)定，以后可以隨便在餐桌上使用電子產(chǎn)品。”

I did not have an answer, and although some people might have opinions, no one has a true scientific understanding of what the future might hold for a generation raised on portable screens.

我沒(méi)有答案，盡管一些人可以能有自己的看法，可是，沒(méi)有人真正科學(xué)地研究過(guò)，從小用著便攜屏幕長(zhǎng)大的一代的未來(lái)如何。

“We really don’t know the full neurological effects of these technologies yet,” said Dr. Gary Small, director of the Longevity Center at the University of California, Los Angeles, and author of “iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind.” “Children, like adults, vary quite a lot, and some are more sensitive than others to an abundance of screen time.”

洛杉磯加利福尼亞大學(xué)(University of California)壽命中心(Longevity Center)主任、《大腦革命：數(shù)字時(shí)代如何改變了人們的大腦和行為》(iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind)一書(shū)的作者蓋瑞·斯默爾(Gary Small)博士說(shuō)，“我們真的還不了解這些技術(shù)產(chǎn)生的所有神經(jīng)學(xué)影響。兒童和成年人一樣，存在很大的個(gè)體差異，有些人對(duì)長(zhǎng)時(shí)間使用電子屏幕的影響更敏感。”

But Dr. Small says we do know that the brain is highly sensitive to stimuli, like iPads and smartphone screens, and if people spend too much time with one technology, and less time interacting with people like parents at the dinner table, that could hinder the development of certain communications skills.

不過(guò)，斯默爾博士說(shuō)，我們的確知道，大腦對(duì)iPad和智能手機(jī)屏幕等刺激物高度敏感，如果人們?cè)谝粋€(gè)科技產(chǎn)品上花去過(guò)多的時(shí)間，而更少地與其他人互動(dòng)，如餐桌旁的父母，那可能會(huì)阻礙某種交流技能的發(fā)展。

So will a child who plays with crayons at dinner rather than a coloring application on an iPad be a more socialized person?

那么，一個(gè)在吃飯時(shí)玩蠟筆的兒童，會(huì)比一個(gè)在iPad上玩著色應(yīng)用軟件的兒童有更強(qiáng)的社交能力嗎?

Ozlem Ayduk, an associate professor in the Relationships and Social Cognition Lab at the University of California, Berkeley, said children sitting at the dinner table with a print book or crayons were not as engaged with the people around them, either. “There are value-based lessons for children to talk to the people during a meal,” she said. “It’s not so much about the iPad versus nonelectronics.”

加州大學(xué)伯克利分校(University of California, Berkeley)人際關(guān)系與社會(huì)認(rèn)知實(shí)驗(yàn)室(Relationships and Social Cognition Lab)助理教授厄茲萊姆·艾杜克(Ozlem Ayduk)說(shuō)，拿著一本書(shū)或蠟筆坐在餐桌邊的兒童同樣也不會(huì)和周?chē)娜嘶?dòng)。她說(shuō)，“在就餐時(shí)讓兒童和他人說(shuō)話，有時(shí)會(huì)是一種寶貴的學(xué)習(xí)過(guò)程。這和是 iPad還是非電子物品沒(méi)有太大關(guān)系。”

Parents who have little choice but to hand over their iPad can at least control what a child does on those devices.

在沒(méi)有選擇的情況下迫不得已地把iPad交給孩子的父母，至少可以控制一個(gè)孩子利用此類(lèi)設(shè)備干些什么。

A report published last week by the Millennium Cohort Study, a long-term study group in Britain that has been following 19,000 children born in 2000 and 2001, found that those who watched more than three hours of television, videos or DVDs a day had a higher chance of conduct problems, emotional symptoms and relationship problems by the time they were 7 than children who did not. The study, of a sample of 11,000 children, found that children who played video games — often age-appropriate games — for the same amount of time did not show any signs of negative behavioral changes by the same age.

上周，一個(gè)曾追蹤2000年和2001年誕生的1.9萬(wàn)名嬰兒的長(zhǎng)期性英國(guó)研究組織“千禧世代研究”(Millennium Cohort Study)發(fā)布的一份報(bào)告發(fā)現(xiàn)，到這些兒童7歲時(shí)，那些在一天內(nèi)看電視、視頻或DVD超過(guò)三小時(shí)的兒童，比不曾這么做的兒童更有可能出現(xiàn)行為問(wèn)題、情感癥狀和人際關(guān)系問(wèn)題。這項(xiàng)研究對(duì)1.1萬(wàn)名兒童進(jìn)行了采樣，發(fā)現(xiàn)玩符合其年齡段的電子游戲達(dá)同樣時(shí)長(zhǎng)的兒童，在7歲時(shí)卻沒(méi)有展示出任何負(fù)面行為變化的跡象。

Which brings us back to the dinner table with my niece and nephew. While they sat happily staring into those shiny screens, they were not engaged in any type of conversation, or staring off into space thinking, as my sister and I did as children when our parents were talking. And that is where the risks are apparent.

這就回到了那次有我的外甥女和外甥在座的晚餐。當(dāng)他們愉快地坐在那里，盯著光亮的屏幕時(shí)，他們沒(méi)有參與任何談話，也沒(méi)有盯著某個(gè)空間進(jìn)行思考，完全不像我和姐姐小時(shí)候父母談話時(shí)所做的那樣。這正是明顯的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)所在。

“Conversations with each other are the way children learn to have conversations with themselves, and learn how to be alone,” said Sherry Turkle, a professor of science, technology and society at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and author of the book “Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other.” “Learning about solitude and being alone is the bedrock of early development, and you don’t want your kids to miss out on that because you’re pacifying them with a device.”

麻省理工學(xué)院(Massachusetts Institute of Technology)科學(xué)、技術(shù)和社會(huì)研究教授、《一起孤獨(dú)：我們?yōu)楹螌?duì)科技期望更多而對(duì)彼此期望更少》(Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other)一書(shū)的作者謝里·特克爾(Sherry Turkle)說(shuō)，“相互間的交談是兒童學(xué)習(xí)和自己對(duì)話的途徑，也是他們學(xué)習(xí)如何獨(dú)處的途徑。了解寂寞和獨(dú)處是早期發(fā)育的根基，因?yàn)橐屗麄儼察o下來(lái)就把這種設(shè)備塞給他們，可不是一件好事。”

Ms. Turkle has interviewed parents, teenagers and children about the use of gadgets during early development, and says she fears that children who do not learn real interactions, which often have flaws and imperfections, will come to know a world where perfect, shiny screens give them a false sense of intimacy without risk.

特克爾曾就個(gè)人在早期發(fā)育階段使用電子設(shè)備的問(wèn)題采訪過(guò)父母、青少年和兒童。她說(shuō)，現(xiàn)實(shí)里的互動(dòng)往往存在缺陷和瑕疵，她擔(dān)心，不學(xué)習(xí)現(xiàn)實(shí)里的互動(dòng)的兒童，將只會(huì)認(rèn)識(shí)一個(gè)完美光亮的屏幕給他們帶來(lái)的沒(méi)有風(fēng)險(xiǎn)、充滿(mǎn)虛假親密感的世界。