Abstract
This study investigated the impact of conversational agent formality on summary writing and self-efficacy in a conversation-based intelligent tutoring system. Conversational agents guided learners to learn summarization strategies in one of three conditions: a formal language, an informal language, and a mixed language condition. Results showed no significant difference in summary writing gains between groups, but learners in the informal language group achieved higher self-efficacy gains than learners in the formal language group when controlling for demographic attributes, years of English learning, prior perception of summary writing, and prior reading and summary writing proficiency. Results also indicated a negative association between self-efficacy gains and summary writing gains with a marginal significance. Implications are discussed for the design of conversational agents in the ITS.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kim, Y., Baylor, A.L.: Research-based design of pedagogical agent roles: a review, progress, and recommendations. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 26(1), 160–169 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0055-y
Chattaraman, V., Kwon, W.-S., Gilbert, J.E., Ross, K.: Should AI-based, conversational digital assistants employ social- or task-oriented interaction style? A task-competency and reciprocity perspective for older adults. Compt. Hum. Behav. 90, 315–330 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.048
Ginns, P., Martin, A.J., Marsh, H.W.: Designing instructional text in a conversational style: a meta-analysis. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 25(4), 445–472 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9228-0
Graesser, A.C., Li, H., Forsyth, C.: Learning by communicating in natural language with conversational agents. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23, 374–380 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414540680
Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S., Cai, Z., Conley, M., Li, H., Pennebaker, J.: Coh-metrix measures text characteristics at multiple levels of language and discourse. Elem. Sch. J. 115, 210–229 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1086/678293
Li, H., Cheng, Q., Yu, Q., Graesser, A.C.: The role of peer agent’s learning competency in trialogue-based reading intelligent systems. In: Conati, C., Heffernan, N., Mitrovic, A., Verdejo, MFelisa (eds.) AIED 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9112, pp. 694–697. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19773-9_94
Li, H., Graesser, A.: Impact of pedagogical agents’ conversational formality on learning and engagement. In: André, E., Baker, R., Hu, X., Rodrigo, M.M.T., du Boulay, B. (eds.) AIED 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10331, pp. 188–200. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61425-0_16
Li, H., Graesser, A.C.: Impact of conversational formality on the quality and formality of written summaries. In: Bittencourt, I.I., Cukurova, M., Muldner, K., Luckin, R., Millán, E. (eds.) AIED 2020. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12163, pp. 321–332. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_26
Li, H., Graesser, A.C.: The impact of conversational agents’ language on summary writing. J. Res. Technol. Educ. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1826022
Lin, L., Ginns, P., Wang, T., Zhang, P.: Using a pedagogical agent to deliver conversational style instruction: what benefits can you obtain? Comput. Educ. 143 (2020)
Mayer, R.E.: Designing multimedia instruction in anatomy: an evidence-based approach. Clin. Anat. 33, 2–11 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.23265
Reichelt, M., Kämmerer, F., Niegemann, H.M., Zander, S.: Talk to me personally: personalization of language style in computer-based learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 35, 199–210 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.005
Riehemann, J., Jucks, R.: Address me personally!: on the role of language styles in a MOOC. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 34, 713–719 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12278
Shell, D.F., Colvin, C., Bruning, R.H.: Self-efficacy, attribution, and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement: grade-level and achievement-level differences. J. Educ. Psychol. 87(3), 386–398 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.386
Acknowledgments
This work was funded by the Institute of Education Sciences (Grant No. R305C120001).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Li, H., Cheng, F., Wang, G., Graeser, A. (2022). The Impact of Conversational Agents’ Language on Self-efficacy and Summary Writing. In: Rodrigo, M.M., Matsuda, N., Cristea, A.I., Dimitrova, V. (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13355. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11644-5_48
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11644-5_48
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-11643-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-11644-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)