skip to main content
10.1145/3320435.3323464acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesumapConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Adaptive E-Learning: Motivating Learners whilst Adapting Feedback to Cultural Background

Published:07 June 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

The personalization of feedback by an Intelligent Tutoring System has the potential to greatly improve learner motivation. This PhD investigates how an Intelligent Tutoring System can adapt to the cultural background of learners when giving feedback. The research uses the user-as-wizard method for investigation. To convey the cultural background of the learner in user studies, validated cultural stories (using Hofstede cultural dimensions) are required. These stories are then used to conduct qualitative and empirical studies to investigate how participants from a range of different cultures believe the culture of a learner should affect the kind of feedback given. The insights gathered from these studies will be unified to inspire an algorithm to allow an intelligent tutoring system to utilise these adaptations, and the effects tested on real learners.

References

  1. Malik Almaliki, Nan Jiang, Raian Ali, and Fabiano Dalpiaz. 2014. Gamified culture-aware feedback acquisition. In 2014 IEEE/ACM 7th International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing. IEEE, 624--625.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Scott Brave, Clifford Nass, and Kevin Hutchinson. 2005. Computers that care: investigating the effects of orientation of emotion exhibited by an embodied computer agent. IJHCI, Vol. 62, 2 (2005), 161--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Gabriela Capat^ina. 2015. The implications of culture in e-learning. In The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Vol. 3. " Carol I" National Defence University, 95.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Terry Clark. 1990. International marketing and national character: A review and proposal for an integrative theory. The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 (1990), 66--79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Matt Dennis, Judith Masthoff, and Chris Mellish. 2012. Adapting performance feedback to a learner's conscientiousness. In International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization. Springer, Springer Heidelberg Dordrecht London New York, Montreal, Canada, 297--302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Matt Dennis, Judith Masthoff, and Chris Mellish. 2013. Does learner conscientiousness matter when generating emotional support in feedback?. In Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (ACII), 2013 Humaine Association Conference on. IEEE, IEEE, Geneva, Switzerland, 209--214. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Matt Dennis, Judith Masthoff, and Chris Mellish. 2016. Adapting progress feedback and emotional support to learner personality. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Vol. 26, 3 (2016), 877--931.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Matthew Gordon Dennis. 2014. Adapting feedback to learner personality to increase motivation . Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Aberdeen.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Steve Downey, Rose Mary Wentling, Tim Wentling, and Andrew Wadsworth. 2005. The relationship between national culture and the usability of an e-learning system. Human Resource Development International, Vol. 8, 1 (2005), 47--64.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Andrea Edmundson. 2006. Globalized e-learning cultural challenges .IGI Global. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Evangelia Gouli, Agoritsa Gogoulou, Kyparisia A Papanikolaou, and Maria Grigoriadou. 2006. An adaptive feedback framework to support reflection, guiding and tutoring. In Advances in web-based education: Personalized learning environments. IGI Global, Web, 178--202.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. ET Hall. 1976. Beyond Culture, New York (Anchor Press) 1976. Anchor Books, United States of America.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. G.H. Hofstede and G. Hofstede. 2001. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations .SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks California. lc00010498 https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=w6z18LJ_1VsCGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. G. Hofstede, G.J. Hofstede, and M. Minkov. 2010. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, Third Edition .McGraw-Hill Education, USA. 91000205Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. G Tanner Jackson and Arthur C Graesser. 2007. Content matters: An investigation of feedback categories within an ITS. Fr Art Int, Vol. 158 (2007), 127.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Simy Joy and David A Kolb. 2009. Are there cultural differences in learning style? International Journal of intercultural relations, Vol. 33, 1 (2009), 69--85.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Jonathan Klein, Youngme Moon, and Rosalind W. Picard. 2002. This computer responds to user frustration: Theory, design, and results. Interact Comput, Vol. 14, 2 (2002), 119--140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Judith Masthoff. 2006. The user as wizard: A method for early involvement in the design and evaluation of adaptive systems. In Fifth Workshop on User-Centred Design and Evaluation of Adaptive Systems, Vol. 1. User-Centred Design and Evaluation of Adaptive Systems, Dublin, Ireland, 460--469.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Brendan McSweeney. 2002. Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith-a failure of analysis. Human relations, Vol. 55, 1 (2002), 89--118.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Debra K Meyer and Julianne C Turner. 2002. Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research. Educ Psychol, Vol. 37, 2 (2002), 107--114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Hien Nguyen and Judith Masthoff. 2009. Designing empathic computers: the effect of multimodal empathic feedback using animated agent. In Persuasive. ACM, 7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Juliet Okpo, Matt Dennis, Judith Masthoff, Kirsten A Smith, and Nigel Beacham. 2016. Exploring requirements for an adaptive exercise selection system. In PALE 2016: Workshop on Personalization Approaches in Learning Environments . CEUR-WS, Halifax, NS, Canada, 313--316.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ana Paiva, Joao Dias, Daniel Sobral, Ruth Aylett, Polly Sobreperez, Sarah Woods, Carsten Zoll, and Lynne Hall. 2004. Caring for agents and agents that care: Building empathic relations with synthetic agents. In AAMAS. ACM, 194--201. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Helmut Prendinger and Mitsuru Ishizuka. 2005. The empathic companion: A character-based interface that addresses users'affective states. Appl Artif Intell, Vol. 19, 3--4 (2005), 267--285.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Jennifer Robison, Scott McQuiggan, and James Lester. 2009a. Evaluating the consequences of affective feedback in intelligent tutoring systems. In ACII Workshops, 2009. IEEE, ieee, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Jennifer L Robison, Scott W Mcquiggan, and James C Lester. 2009b. Modeling Task-Based vs. Affect-based Feedback Behavior in Pedagogical Agents: An Inductive Approach.. In AIED. Springer, 25--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Muhammad Sidi-Ali, Judith Masthoff, Matt Dennis, Jacek Kopecky, and Nigel Beacham. 2019. Adapting Performance And Emotional Support Feedback To Cultural Differences. In 27th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization. ACM, Larnaca, Cyprus, 9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Kirsten A. Smith, Matt Dennis, Judith Masthoff, and Nava Tintarev. 2019. A methodology for creating and validating psychological stories for conveying and measuring psychological traits. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, Vol. Early Online (19 Mar 2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Ana Maria Soares, Minoo Farhangmehr, and Aviv Shoham. 2007. Hofstede's dimensions of culture in international marketing studies. Journal of business research, Vol. 60, 3 (2007), 277--284.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Vas Taras, Julie Rowney, and Piers Steel. 2009. Half a century of measuring culture: Review of approaches, challenges, and limitations based on the analysis of 121 instruments for quantifying culture. Journal of International Management, Vol. 15, 4 (2009), 357--373.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner. 2011. Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business .Hachette UK, United Kingdom.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Ekaterina Vasilyeva, Mykola Pechenizkiy, and Paul De Bra. 2007. Adaptation of Feedback in e-learning System at Individual and Group Level, In 11th International Conference on User Modeling. Proc. of PING, Vol. 1, 49--56.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Chin-Yeh Wang, Gwo-Dong Chen, Chen-Chung Liu, and Baw-Jhiune Liu. 2009. Design an Empathic Virtual Human to Encourage and Persuade Learners in e-Learning Systems. In Proceedings of the First ACM Int. Workshop on Multimedia Technologies for Distance Learning (MTDL '09). ACM, 27--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Boonghee Yoo, Naveen Donthu, and Tomasz Lenartowicz. 2011. Measuring Hofstede's five dimensions of cultural values at the individual level: Development and validation of CVSCALE. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 23, 3--4 (2011), 193--210.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Adaptive E-Learning: Motivating Learners whilst Adapting Feedback to Cultural Background

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      UMAP '19: Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization
      June 2019
      377 pages
      ISBN:9781450360210
      DOI:10.1145/3320435

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 June 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      UMAP '19 Paper Acceptance Rate30of122submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate162of633submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader