The media reports that there is a recommendation AI should interact with children. #
Posted August 3, 2026 [ Reviewed by Tyler Woods
](/us/docs/editorial-process)
Key points
- Empathy and Theory of Mind are not optional.
- AI cannot and does not offer genuine emotional presence.
- Skills, knowledge, and learning mature gradually, and require constant work.
Recently, there has been conversation in the media to the effect that artificial intelligence (AI) should be used to communicate and engage with children. This advice needs to be considered in light of what the research indicates is taking place. AI cannot and does not offer genuine emotional presence, nor can it model or convey the subtle, unpredictable dynamics of human interactions, nor family nuances or cultural or social complexities (Li & Lee, 2025).
The message is unambiguous: Relying on AI as a substitute for parental or other human engagement risks further displacing the profound experiences children especially need to hear and engage in face-to-face conversations, and years of physical play—at the very minimum—to cultivate healthy, holistic cognitive, emotional, psychological, personal, and social development, including empathy and Theory of Mind.
For empathy and Theory of Mind to develop, constant face-to-face human communication from birth, along with its associated social scaffolding and developmental processes, must unrelentingly take place to bring about the required holistic—brain, mind, and body—healthy, ethical, and complex universal human condition (Li & Lee, 2025). Skills, knowledge, cognitive and emotional intelligence, empathy, and Theory of Mind are foundational, holistic capacities that begin at birth. When a baby first looks into their mother’s face and eyes and hears their mother’s voice, this marks the start of the all-important forever communication process that begins the journey toward understanding oneself, others, and the external world (Kurian, 2025).
These neurological and learning systems will only mature through ongoing, continuous face-to-face communication, involving constant talking, listening, and observing. The development of empathy and Theory of Mind requires repeated, embodied, i.e., personal reciprocal social experiences that involve facial expressions, tone of voice, gesture, and shared attention; all of which are part of the universal human condition.
As the research indicates, when these experiences are reduced or replaced by digital interaction, the developmental trajectory can change and fail to develop. Critically, prolonged screen‑mediated interaction erodes empathy and Theory of Mind by stripping away the embodied cues that scaffold neurological, psychological, intellectual, emotional and behavioral development.
The evidence is unambiguous: empathy and Theory of Mind are not optional; they are absolute, immutable developmental necessities. Without these intrinsic states being present in the universal human condition, the research indicates that individuals will tend to struggle to interpret nuances, regulate emotion, and successfully engage in cooperative behavior. When these profound states are absent, research indicates that individuals may even engage in behaviors that could be described as being antisocial.
An additional key factor is the absence of personal social learning interactions. This all-important universal personal social learning interaction is the required process of face‑to‑face experiences that helps develop and advance the holistic universal human condition, thereby helping children, adolescents and adults better understand themselves and others.
When this is taking place, there is also the ongoing potential of advancing critical thinking and higher-order reasoning, and it also provides the potential to develop and enhance emotional intelligence, self‑regulation, self-management, self-discipline, and, importantly, ethical and moral intelligence (Kurian, 2025; Li & Lee, 2025; Swarts, 2022).
However, as the research indicates, none of this can or will develop in the “cocoon” of digital environments. As the research also indicates, a digital environment can—and actually does—lead to reduced emotional intelligence, diminished cognitive and intellectual perspective‑taking, and diminished ethical and moral insights, rather than advancing self‑reflective intellectual, ethical, and moral understanding (Chen et al., 2017; Kurian, 2025; Li & Lee, 2025; Soares et al., 2023).
This can also lead to difficulty developing integrity and genuine, stable relationships, which can also reduce tolerance for different points of view, impair conflict-resolution potential, and, as noted, lead to antisocial behaviors (Chen et al., 2017; Kurian, 2025; Li & Lee, 2025; Soares et al., 2023).
At the societal and even broader civilizational level, the implications are profound. A population with no insight into empathy and/or Theory of Mind becomes more susceptible to ethical and moral disengagement. As such, it can even become a danger to itself.
When individuals lack the cognitive, intellectual, emotional, and psychological self‑reflective insight to recognize the emotional and psychological states of others, this is when there is a serious risk of personal relationship failures and also of the broader community becoming socially disruptive, and, as noted, antisocial (Bandura, 1999; Kurian, 2025; Li & Lee, 2025).
For the first time in human history—and it is important to note that this is just the beginning—what we have now in AI is an all-powerful technology that can and does present information faster than humans and, self-evidently, much, much more. As the research indicates, AI “has answers,” but it is not the answer in the development of a holistic, healthy, and ethical universal human condition. This can only be developed, advanced, and enhanced through constant face‑to‑face human communication. As the research indicates, if this does not occur, the brain and mind of the universal human condition will be adversely affected (Kurian, 2025; Li & Lee, 2025).
Sasha Rogelberg (2026), writing in Fortune, reported that the United States invested more than $30 billion over a 20-year period to expand access to laptops and tablets in schools, broadening access to information and improving learning and educational outcomes.
The evidence accumulated over those 20 years discovered that the widespread introduction of digital devices in classrooms coincided with a measurable decline in students’ academic, cognitive, and educational abilities.
All of the neuroscience, educational, pedagogical, psychological, and learning research unambiguously indicates that for skills, knowledge, empathy, emotional intelligence, and Theory of Mind to develop and advance, this process must begin at birth and continue through sustained, never-ending human interactions.
This involves specific personal learning actions that advance and enhance intellectual and skill acquisition, critical thinking, and higher‑order reasoning from birth through childhood, adolescence, and adulthood.
As such, it is important to note that the brain undergoes continuous major structural changes well into early adulthood, including significant maturational reorganization extending into the late 20s and early 30s. Plus, adult neurogenesis (the formation of new neurons) can continue throughout a lifetime (Gage, 2025; Mousley et al., 2025).
When this essential developmental process is weakened, displaced, or interrupted, the personal and social consequences can become increasingly serious. As noted, this concern, in part, is objectively reflected in the 20‑year study reported by Sasha Rogelberg (2026), which highlights the measurable negative impact that digitally dominated environments are now having on students’ academic and cognitive development. Where to from here?
References
Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. PubMed: PMID: 15661671 PubMed & OpenAlex DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
Chen, J., Nevicka, B., Homan, A. C., & van Kleef, G. A. (2017). You are what you read: Antagonistic narcissism predicts increased preference for antisocial and reduced preference for prosocial information. *Personality and Individual Differences, 111,*1–7. OpenAlex DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2025.104653 OpenAlex and Google Scholar HTML: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656625000856
Gage, F. H. (2025). Adult neurogenesis in the human dentate gyrus. *Hippocampus, *35(1), e23655. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.23655 PubMed PMID: 39648699 OpenAlex HTML: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hipo.23655
Kurian, N. (2025). AI's empathy gap: The risks of conversational Artificial Intelligence for young children's well-being and key ethical considerations for early childhood education and care. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 26(1), 132–139. Open Alex & Sage DOI: 10.1177/14639491231206004 Google Scholar & Semantic Scholar PDF: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/14639491231206004
Li, P. H., & Lee, J. C. K. (2025). AI, brain, and child: Navigating the intersection of artificial intelligence, neuroscience, and child development. AI, Brain and Child, 1(1), 3. OpenAlex & AI, Brain and Child, 1(1), 3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44436-025-00004-4 OpenAlex & Google Scholar PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44436-025-00004-4.pdf
Mousley, A., Bethlehem, R. A., Yeh, F. C., & Astle, D. E. (2025). Topological turning points across the human lifespan. Nature Communications, 16(1), 10055. PubMed: PMID: 41290675; PMCID: PMC12647875 Nature Communications & OpenAlex DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-65974-8 Google Scholar PDF: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-65974-8.pdf
Rogelberg, S. (2026). The U.S. spent $30 billion to ditch textbooks for laptops and tablets: The result is the first generation less cognitively capable than their parents. *Fortune. *https://fortune.com/2026/02/21/laptops-tablets-schools-gen-z-less-cogni…
Soares, F. B., Gruzd, A., Jacobson, J., & Hodson, J. (2023). To troll or not to troll: Young adults’ anti-social behaviour on social media. PLoS one, 18(5), e0284374 PLoS one & OpenAlex DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284374 OpenAlex & Google Scholar PDF available.
Swarts, P. (2022). Connecting embodied learning to social and environmental responsibility for the realisation of Life Orientation outcomes. Perspectives in Education, 40(2), 84–96. ERIC Number: EJ1348162 Perspectives in Education, 40(2), 84–96 & Open Alex DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v40.i2.7 OpenAlex & Google Scholar PDF is available.