A Digital Coach That Provides Affective and Social Learning Support to Low-Literate Learners

Schouten, Dylan G. M.; Venneker, Fleur; Bosse, Tibor; Neerincx, Mark A.; Cremers, Anita

doi:10.1109/tlt.2017.2698471

Cited by 21 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examples include Rexy (Benedetto & Cremonesi, 2019), which helps students enroll in Fig. 4 The fields of the chatbots in the selected articles (Griol et al, 2011;Latham et al, 2011;Tegos et al, 2015;Benotti et al, 2017;Clarizia et al, 2018;Coronado et al, 2018;Verleger & Pembridge, 2018;Ondáš et al, 2019;Lee et al, 2020;Qin et al, 2020;Winkler et al, 2020;Daud et al, 2020) General 10 (Redondo-Hernández & Pérez-Marín, 2011;Song et al, 2017;Schouten et al, 2017;Benedetto & Cremonesi, 2019;Janati et al, 2020;Tegos et al, 2020;Villegas-Ch et al, 2020;Zedadra et al, 2014;da Silva Oliveira et al, 2019) Language 6…”

Section: Rq2: What Platforms Do the Proposed Chatbots Operate On?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then the motivational agent reacts to the answer with varying emotions, including empathy and approval, to motivate students. Similarly, the chatbot in (Schouten et al, 2017) shows various reactionary emotions and motivates students with encouraging phrases such as "you have already achieved a lot today". (Griol et al, 2011;Latham et al, 2011;Redondo-Hernández & Pérez-Marín, 2011;Rodrigo et al, 2012;Alobaidi et al, 2013;Matsuda et al, 2013;Zedadra et al, 2014;D'mello & Graesser, 2013;Daud et al, 2020;Griol et al, 2014;Ayedoun et al, 2017;Hayashi, 2013;Coronado et al, 2018;Schouten et al, 2017;Ruan et al, 2019;Law et al, 2020;Winkler et al, 2020;Wambsganss et al, 2021) Intent based 13 (Benotti et al, 2017;Song et al, 2017;Clarizia et al, 2018;…”

Section: Motivational Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The idea is to sup-port learners, mainly when a problematic situation arises, to increase their learning motivation. On the other hand, to assess the learning for low-literate people, Schouten et al (2017) built their conversation agent to categorize four basic emotions: anger, fear, sadness, and happiness. Depending on the situation, the chatbot shows students an empathetic reaction.…”

Section: Rq5 -What Are the Principles Used To Guide The Design Of The...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chatbots hold the promise of revolutionizing education by engaging learners, personalizing learning activities, supporting educators, and developing deep insight into learners’ behavior. However, there is a lack of studies that analyze the recent evidence-based chatbot-learner interaction design techniques applied in education. This study presents a systematic review of 36 papers to understand, compare, and reflect on recent attempts to utilize chatbots in education using seven dimensions: educational field, platform, design principles, the role of chatbots, interaction styles, evidence, and limitations. The results show that the chatbots were mainly designed on a web platform to teach computer science, language, general education, and a few other fields such as engineering and mathematics. Further, more than half of the chatbots were used as teaching agents, while more than a third were peer agents. Most of the chatbots used a predetermined conversational path, and more than a quarter utilized a personalized learning approach that catered to students’ learning needs, while other chatbots used experiential and collaborative learning besides other design principles. Moreover, more than a third of the chatbots were evaluated with experiments, and the results primarily point to improved learning and subjective satisfaction. Challenges and limitations include inadequate or insufficient dataset training and a lack of reliance on usability heuristics. Future studies should explore the effect of chatbot personality and localization on subjective satisfaction and learning effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Rq2: What Platforms Do the Proposed Chatbots Operate On?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Motivational Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rq5 -What Are the Principles Used To Guide The Design Of The...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In smart services, these systems are often embodied as virtual characters (avatars) to enhance user experience. This cluster is represented by a digital coach for affective and social learning support (Schouten, Venneker, Bosse, Neerincx, & Cremers, 2018).…”

Section: Cluster 2: Chatbot Operatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value Co-Creation in Smart Services: A Functional Affordances Perspective on Smart Personal Assistants

Knote¹,

Janson²,

Söllner³

et al. 2021

JAIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the realm of smart services, smart personal assistants (SPAs) have become a popular medium for value co-creation between service providers and users. The market success of SPAs is largely based on their innovative material properties, such as natural language user interfaces, machine learning-powered request handling and service provision, and anthropomorphism. In different combinations, these properties offer users entirely new ways to intuitively and interactively achieve their goals and thus co-create value with service providers. But how does the nature of the SPA shape value co-creation processes? In this paper, we look through a functional affordances lens to theorize about the effects of different types of SPAs (i.e., with different combinations of material properties) on users’ value co-creation processes. Specifically, we collected SPAs from research and practice by reviewing scientific literature and web resources, developed a taxonomy of SPAs’ material properties, and performed a cluster analysis to group SPAs of a similar nature. We then derived 2 general and 11 cluster-specific propositions on how different material properties of SPAs can yield different affordances for value co-creation. With our work, we point out that smart services require researchers and practitioners to fundamentally rethink value co-creation as well as revise affordances theory to address the dynamic nature of smart technology as a service counterpart.

show abstract

“…In a next SCE iteration, we turn our attention towards building a prototype that provides support not only contingent on the learner's cognitive needs, but also their affective and social needs (cf. Schouten et al 2017b).…”

Section: Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using scaffolding to formalize digital coach support for low-literate learners

Schouten

Massink

Donker

et al. 2020

User Model User-Adap Inter

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we attempt to specify the cognitive support behavior of a previously designed embodied conversational agent coach that provides learning support to low-literates. Three knowledge gaps are identified in the existing work: an incomplete specification of the behaviors that make up ‘support,’ an incomplete specification of how this support can be personalized, and unclear speech recognition rules. We use the socio-cognitive engineering method to update our foundation of knowledge with new online banking exercises, low-level scaffolding and user modeling theory, and speech recognition. We then refine the design of our coach agent by creating comprehensive cognitive support rules that adapt support based on learner needs (the ‘Generalized’ approach) and attune the coach’s support delay to user performance in previous exercises (the ‘Individualized’ approach). A prototype is evaluated in a 3-week within- and between-subjects experiment. Results show that the specified cognitive support is effective: Learners complete all exercises, interact meaningfully with the coach, and improve their online banking self-efficacy. Counter to hypotheses, the Individualized approach does not improve on the Generalized approach. Whether this indicates suboptimal operationalization or a deeper problem with the Individualized approach remains as future work.

show abstract

A Digital Coach That Provides Affective and Social Learning Support to Low-Literate Learners

Cited by 21 publications

References 33 publications

Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review

Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review

Value Co-Creation in Smart Services: A Functional Affordances Perspective on Smart Personal Assistants

Using scaffolding to formalize digital coach support for low-literate learners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About