Human agency beliefs affect older adults' interaction behaviours and task performance when learning with computerised partners

Abstract

Computer-mediated systems can support aging in-place, although little is known about how older adults interact with these systems and how they learn from them. Using a Wizard-of-Oz paradigm, this study compared how older adults interacted and learned with a system that they believed was a human, and with a system they believed was a computer. While both systems were identical, the human system used natural speech and the computer system used synthetic speech. In a within-subjects design, twenty-four older adults aged 60-85 years completed a collaborative learning task with both the human and computer systems. The task involved negotiating and learning referential labels for abstract tangram shapes. A learning effect was observed in both conditions. However, participants took longer to complete the task when they believed they were interacting with a computer, were less accurate in their answers, changed their answers more, and recalled them with less detail after a delay, compared to when they believed they were interacting with a human. These findings suggest that beliefs about agency affect how efficiently and how accurately older adults learn with technology, which has implications for computer mediated support in aging.

Collaborative learning of new information in older age: a systematic review

“…Younger adults did have improved delayed recall United Kingdom PhD thesis non-randomized experimental study 24 N N perceived human versus computer partner adapted version of Map Task older adults modified their interaction when learning with a human or a computer. Older adults recalled fewer details of routes learned with the computer partner and found the learning experience more difficult Crompton & MacPherson [ 85 ] United Kingdom research article non-randomized experimental study 24 N N perceived human versus computer partner referential task/Barrier Task participants in the computer condition were slower, took fewer turns, and recalled less Crompton et al . [ 86 ] United Kingdom research article non-randomized experimental study 48 Y N familiar, unfamiliar referential task/Barrier Task older adults’ performance became indistinguishable from younger adults over time, no effect of familiarity Derksen et al .…”

“…This is likely due to the different versions available, including those produced by Clark & Wilkes-Gibbs [ 100 ] and Krauss & Weinheimer [ 101 ]. Some studies used 10 images per trial [ 88 , 89 ] while others used 12 images [ 7 , 85 , 86 , 92 , 98 ]. Also, the number of trials per session differed, with 4 trials [ 88 , 98 ], 6 trials [ 7 , 87 , 89 ], 9 trials [ 85 , 86 ] or more [ 92 ] per condition.…”

“…Some studies used 10 images per trial [ 88 , 89 ] while others used 12 images [ 7 , 85 , 86 , 92 , 98 ]. Also, the number of trials per session differed, with 4 trials [ 88 , 98 ], 6 trials [ 7 , 87 , 89 ], 9 trials [ 85 , 86 ] or more [ 92 ] per condition. Lastly, some pairs completed the task via a computer [ 86 , 98 ], whereas others did it in person.…”

“…Of the works included, two studies ( n = 2) examined whether collaboration in older adults differed when working with a (perceived) human partner or with a computer. In these studies [ 82 , 85 ], participants were told that they would be working with a human partner and would communicate through a computer, as well as working with a computer program, to complete the task. In fact, feedback in both conditions was provided by a computer, but the perceived human partner's programming used natural language.…”

Learning computer algorithms through dynamic visualizations: Benefits of ‘AlgoRythmics’ videos

“…Because of the human factor, the AlgoRythmics approach relates to some results in the field of neuroscience of social cognition and pedagogical agents. A number of studies have linked specific brain circuits to certain aspects of social perception and interaction (Crompton & MacPherson, 2019). For instance, it was observed that certain regions of our brain shows higher sensitivity to images of human faces and bodies compared to images of objects (Downing et al, 2001; Kanwisher et al, 1997).…”