PDF(1540 KB)
PDF(1540 KB)
PDF(1540 KB)
人机合作育儿：高强度母职与智能化教养的划界工作与关系调节
Human-AI Robots Cooperative Child-Rearing: Boundary Work and Relationship Adjustment on Intensive Mothering and Intelligent Childcare
AI技术加持的早教与陪伴机器人逐步嵌入中国家庭的亲职劳动，本研究将这一媒介现象概括为“人机合作育儿”。受“贤妻良母”传统文化意识的影响，育儿劳动成为一种“高强度母职”。现有研究多聚焦智能育儿机器人之于高强度母职的赋权与冲突，而对于女性与智能化育儿代理人的契洽与抵抗、互动与区隔等复杂关系还缺乏深入细致的讨论。本研究以“划界工作”这一社会学概念为基本分析框架，基于对正使用智能育儿机器人的20位中国中产阶层女性的深度访谈与参与式观察，发现女性以人机合作育儿的意义、场景与风格作为划界工作的三种取向，调节、确认与重构高强度母职与智能化教养的互动关系。“人机合作育儿”充分展现了性别与技术的交叉如何在动态中强化又削弱女性的母职经验，彰显了技术干预下代间连结与社会性别互动的复杂性。
Against the background of the increasing integration of AI-enabled early childhood education and companion robots into Chinese family dynamics, this study characterizes this mediated phenomenon as “Human-AI Robots Cooperative Child-Rearing”. Under the influence of the traditional cultural ideals of “being a dutiful wife and loving mother”, child-rearing has evolved into what is termed “intensive mothering”. At present, the majority of research centers on the dualistic “empowerment-conflict” relationship between AI child-rearing robots and intensive mothering, while neglecting in-depth and comprehensive exploration of the intricate dynamics of consensus, resistance, interaction, and segmentation between women and AI child-rearing surrogates. Using the sociological concept of “boundary work” as its foundational analytical framework, this study is grounded in in-depth interviews and participant observation with 20 middle-class Chinese women who employ AI child-rearing robots in their households. The study found that women utilize the meanings, scenes, and styles of human-AI robots cooperative child-rearing as the three key orientations of boundary work, while engaging in adjusting, identifying, and redefining the interactive relationship between intensive mothering and AI child-rearing. Human-AI Robots Cooperative Child-Rearing also illustrates how the intersection between gender and technology both strengthens and challenges women’s maternal experiences dynamically, thus emphasizing the intricate nature of intergenerational connections and gender dynamics when confronted with technological interventions.
人机合作育儿 / 智能机器人 / 高强度母职 / 划界工作 / 关系调节
human-AI robots cooperative child-rearing / AI robots / intensive mothering / boundary work / relationship adjustment
| [1] |
安利利, 李美仪(2023). “共生”与“契洽”:城市中产家庭婆媳合作育儿的媒介实践. 《传播与社会学刊》,(64),129-159.
|
| [2] |
方格格, 郭珂静(2022). 失去的隐秘:智能家居技术的采用与家的重构. 《新闻记者》,(11),83-96.
|
| [3] |
赖立里, 戴媛媛(2022). 多重身体:辅助生殖技术实践的人类学观察. 《妇女研究论丛》,(6),32-42.
|
| [4] |
蓝佩嘉(2019). 《拼教养:全球化、亲职焦虑与不平等童年》(第1版). 台北: 春山出版社.
|
| [5] |
李春玲(2013). 如何定义中国中产阶级:划分中国中产阶级的三个标准. 《学海》,(3),62-71.
|
| [6] |
林昱瑄(2019). 做学术、做妈妈:学术妈妈的建制困境、协商策略与智性母职. 《台湾社会学刊》,(66),125-180.
|
| [7] |
刘思达(2011). 《割据的逻辑》(第1版). 上海: 上海三联书店.
|
| [8] |
钱进, 李威(2024). 智能家居与日常空间实践——一个“数字做家”的视角. 《新闻记者》,(4),88-100.
|
| [9] |
孙萍(2019). 技术、性别与身份认同——IT女性程序员的性别边界协商. 《社会学评论》,(2),71-83.
|
| [10] |
孙信茹, 王偲(2023). “被看见”的家庭生活:抖音中的家务劳动媒介化与可参观性文化. 《新闻与写作》,(8),15-25.
|
| [11] |
乌苏拉·胡斯(2003/2011). 《高科技无产阶级的形成——真实世界里的虚拟工作》(任海龙译)(第1版). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
|
| [12] |
袁艳, 朱琳(2021). AI(爱)心陪伴:中国儿童陪伴机器人的网络化身体与多重男性气质. 《传播与社会学刊》,(57),225-254.
|
| [13] |
中关村在线(2016). 《宝藏！儿童智能陪护机器人市场潜力巨大》.检索于 https://robot.zol.com.cn/606/6062656_all.html#p6076170.
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
Concurrent with the explosive pervasion of information and communication technologies in recent years, mediated communication has gained a strong position in the daily interaction between family members. Based on the results of qualitative interviews with families in Denmark, this article shows how the mobile phone is used by parents and children to mediate a feeling of closeness while they are physically separated. This practice of `connected presence' is based on frequent calls and text messages between parents and children as well as between parents themselves. The article also analyses families' use of the mobile phone in the context of modern family life, emphasizing the importance of the temporal and spatial dispersion of family members in explaining the form and content of intra-familial mediated communication. Finally, the dual role of media technologies (including the mobile phone) in both integrating and dispersing families is discussed.
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
The aim of this article is to advance theoretically the debate on the interrelation between robotization and the domestic sphere. I adopt a critical approach to the political economy about the diffusion of machines in the domestic sphere (unexpected and not predicted by the classical theories of capital) and the automation of everyday life, including that of the human body. In the first part, I focus on why robotics has shifted from the industrial sectors in the domestic sphere and on which features characterize today this sector. Then, I describe the trends that robotics has put in motion in the domestic sphere and Europeans’ attitudes toward it. In the final part, I analyze the processes of automation that are taking place. I will conclude posing the problem of what kind of society we want to build and live in by introducing the social robots and which future perspectives emerge at social level.
|
| [25] |
In this article, I discuss an issue which lies at the core of today’s “political economy” of the domestic sphere. The issue in question is that human beings are pushed to “outsource” their emotions, information, communication, education, organization, and entertainment, while they are left with scarce new technological support with which to cope with the fatigue, stress, boredom, and complexity of housework. My question is “Why has technology which is related to the material aspects of housework ceased to develop, whereas the technology connected to its immaterial aspects (information and communication technologies or ICTs) has grown at an increasing rate?” For answering this question, I analyze briefly how the machinization of the domestic sphere has developed the technologies connected to material labor such as means of transportation and domestic appliances and those connected to immaterial labor such as mass media, ICTs, and new media. A double strategy has always been pursued: a specific strategy is applied to immaterial labor, involving a great deal of technology, and an opposite strategy, involving much less technology, is applied to material labor. This bifurcation is necessary to maintain a high level of value production in everyday life. Nowadays immaterial labor not only creates value in the process of reproduction of the labor force but also generates capital directly. One only needs to think, for example, of Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, and so on. They are basically enterprises which extract value directly from sociability, friendship, and emotion for producing capital.
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
Artificial intelligence (AI) and people’s interactions with it—through virtual agents, socialbots, and language-generation software—do not fit neatly into paradigms of communication theory that have long focused on human–human communication. To address this disconnect between communication theory and emerging technology, this article provides a starting point for articulating the differences between communicative AI and previous technologies and introduces a theoretical basis for navigating these conditions in the form of scholarship within human–machine communication (HMC). Drawing on an HMC framework, we outline a research agenda built around three key aspects of communicative AI technologies: (1) the functional dimensions through which people make sense of these devices and applications as communicators, (2) the relational dynamics through which people associate with these technologies and, in turn, relate to themselves and others, and (3) the metaphysical implications called up by blurring ontological boundaries surrounding what constitutes human, machine, and communication.
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
This article argues that systematic comparative analyses of women's strategies and coping mechanisms lead to a more culturally and temporally grounded understanding of patriarchal systems than the unqualified, abstract notion of patriarchy encountered in contemporary feminist theory. Women strategize within a set of concrete constraints, which I identify as patriarchal bargains. Different forms of patriarchy present women with distinct “rules of the game” and call for different strategies to maximize security and optimize life options with varying potential for active or passive resistance in the face of oppression. Two systems of male dominance are contrasted: the sub-Saharan African pattern, in which the insecurities of polygyny are matched with areas of relative autonomy for women, and classic patriarchy, which is characteristic of South and East Asia as well as the Muslim Middle East. The article ends with an analysis of the conditions leading to the breakdown and transformation of patriarchal bargains and their implications for women's consciousness and struggles.
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
This article examines the complexity of feminized domestic labor in the context of global migration. I view unpaid household labor and paid domestic work not as dichotomous categories but as structural continuities across the public and private spheres. Based on a qualitative study of Filipina migrant domestic workers in Taiwan, I demonstrate how women travel through the maid/madam boundary—housewives in home countries become breadwinners by doing domestic work overseas, and foreign maids turn into foreign brides. While migrant women sell their domestic labor in the market, they remain burdened with gendered responsibilities in their own families. Their simultaneous occupancy of paid and unpaid domestic labor is segmented into distinct spatial settings. I underscore women’s agency by presenting how they articulate their paid and unpaid domestic labor and bargain with the monetary and emotional value of their labor.
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
|
| [50] |
|
| [51] |
|
1. 中产阶层是一个模糊的中间范畴。本研究以职业（具有一定管理权限或技术水平的非体力劳动）、教育（高中及以上）和收入（人均收入高于平均线）标准为划分指标（Gilbert,
2. 分散式家庭是指当代城市的生活方式中，家庭成员白天因学习、工作等原因散布在同一城市的不同地方，晚上才能聚集在一起的情况（Christensen,
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
