No abstract

In this paper we examine the differences in use between distal and proximal demonstrative terms (e.g., singular "this" and "that", and plural "these" and "those" in English). The proximal-distal distinction appears to be made in all languages and therefore promises to be an important window on the cognitive mechanisms underlying language production and comprehension. We address the problem of accounting for the distinction through a corpus-based quantitative study of the deictic use of demonstratives in Dutch. Our study suggests that the distal-proximal distinction corresponds with use of the proximal for intensive/strong indicating (i.e., directing of attention) and the distal for neutral indicating. We compare our findings with empirical findings on the use of English demonstratives and argue that, despite some apparent differences, Dutch and English demonstratives behave roughly similarly though not identically. Finally, we put our findings into context by pulling together evidence from a number of converging sources on the relationship between indicating and describing as alternative modes of reference in the use of distal and proximal demonstratives. This will also lead us to a new understanding of the folk-view on distals and proximals as distinguishing between nearby and faraway objects. Keywords: Proximal and distal demonstratives, accessibility, importance, deictic reference Biographical notes:Paul Piwek (1971) studied computational linguistics and the philosophy of linguistics and cognitive science at the Universities of Tilburg and Amsterdam, obtaining masters degrees in 1993 and 1994, both cum laude. He obtained his PhD from Eindhoven University in 1998, with a thesis on proof-theoretic natural language semantics and pragmatics. After working for some years as a postdoctoral researcher at the Information Technology Research Institute in Brighton, in 2005 he was appointed as a lecturer at the Open University in the UK. His current research interest is in verbal and non-verbal communication in dialogue.

In this study, we investigate if a digital coach for low-literate learners that provides cognitive learning support based on scaffolding can be improved by adding affective learning support based on motivational interviewing, and social learning support based on small talk. Several knowledge gaps are identified: motivational interviewing and small talk must be translated to control rules for this coach, a formal model of participant emotional states is needed to allow the coach to parse the learner's emotional state, and various sensors must be used to let the coach detect and act on this state. We use the situated Cognitive Engineering (sCE) method to update an existing foundation of knowledge with emotional models, motivational interviewing, and small talk theory, technology, and a new exercise in the volunteer work domain. We use this foundation to create a design specification for an Embodied Conversational Agent (ECA) coach that provides cognitive, affective, and social learning support for this exercise. A prototype is created, and compared to a prototype that only provides cognitive support in a within-and between-subjects experiment. Results show that both prototypes work as expected: learners interact with the coach and complete all exercises. Almost no significant differences are found between the two prototypes, indicating that the affective and social support were not effective as designed. Potential improvements are provided for future work. Results also show significant differences between two subgroups of low-literate participants, and between men and women, reinforcing the importance of using individualized support measures with this demographic.

No abstract

People of low literacy could benefit from automated support when learning about societal participation. We design an Embodied Conversational Agent (ECA) ‘coach’ that can provide effective learning support to low-literate learners, develop a prototype virtual learning environment, and evaluate this prototype with low-literate end users. First, we inventory the learning support benefits of ECA coaching. Second, we update existing requirements to better specify functional demands for the coach ECA. Third, we write use cases and develop the prototype. Finally, we evaluate the prototype with low-literate users in a mixed-method within-subjects experiment. Results show that the coach influences the subjective learning experience: Participants report higher positive affect, higher user-system engagement, and increased self-efficacy regarding online banking. These results particularly apply to the domain of challenging information skills exercises. Caveats apply: One of four exercises was significantly more difficult than the other three; and coach support rules were not clearly formalized.