Towards a Theory of Analytical Behaviour: A Model of Decision-Making in Visual Analytics

This paper introduces a descriptive model of the human-computer processes that lead to decision-making in visual analytics. A survey of nine models from the visual analytics and HCI literature are presented to account for different perspectives such as sense-making, reasoning, and low-level human-computer interactions. The survey examines the people and computers (entities) presented in the models, the divisions of labour between entities (both physical and role-based), the behaviour of both people and machines as constrained by their roles and agency, and finally the elements and processes which define the flow of data both within and between entities. The survey informs the identification of four observations that characterise analytical behaviour - defined as decision-making facilitated by visual analytics: bilateral discourse, divisions of labour, mixed-synchronicity information flows, and bounded behaviour. Based on these principles, a descriptive model is presented as a contribution towards a theory of analytical behaviour. The future intention is to apply prospect theory, a economic model of decision-making under uncertainty, to the study of analytical behaviour. It is our assertion that to apply prospect theory first requires a descriptive model of the processes that facilitate decision-making in visual analytics. We conclude it necessary to measure the perception of risk in future work in order to apply prospect theory to the study of analytical behaviour using our proposed model

Analyzing collaborative learning processes automatically

In this article we describe the emerging area of text classification research focused on the problem of collaborative learning process analysis both from a broad perspective and more specifically in terms of a publicly available tool set called TagHelper tools. Analyzing the variety of pedagogically valuable facets of learners’ interactions is a time consuming and effortful process. Improving automated analyses of such highly valued processes of collaborative learning by adapting and applying recent text classification technologies would make it a less arduous task to obtain insights from corpus data. This endeavor also holds the potential for enabling substantially improved on-line instruction both by providing teachers and facilitators with reports about the groups they are moderating and by triggering context sensitive collaborative learning support on an as-needed basis. In this article, we report on an interdisciplinary research project, which has been investigating the effectiveness of applying text classification technology to a large CSCL corpus that has been analyzed by human coders using a theory-based multidimensional coding scheme. We report promising results and include an in-depth discussion of important issues such as reliability, validity, and efficiency that should be considered when deciding on the appropriateness of adopting a new technology such as TagHelper tools. One major technical contribution of this work is a demonstration that an important piece of the work towards making text classification technology effective for this purpose is designing and building linguistic pattern detectors, otherwise known as features, that can be extracted reliably from texts and that have high predictive power for the categories of discourse actions that the CSCL community is interested in

A literature review. Introduction to the special issue

UIDB/00183/2020 UIDP/00183/2020 PTDC/FER-FIL/28278/2017 CHIST-ERA/0002/2019Argumentation schemes [35, 80, 91] are a relatively recent notion that continues an extremely ancient debate on one of the foundations of human reasoning, human comprehension, and obviously human argumentation, i.e., the topics. To understand the revolutionary nature of Walton’s work on this subject matter, it is necessary to place it in the debate that it continues and contributes to, namely a view of logic that is much broader than the formalistic perspective that has been adopted from the 20th century until nowadays. With his book Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning, Walton attempted to start a dialogue between three different fields or views on human reasoning – one (argumentation theory) very recent, one (dialectics) very ancient and with a very long tradition, and one (formal logic) relatively recent, but dominating in philosophy. Argumentation schemes were proposed as dialectical instruments, in the sense that they represented arguments not only as formal relations, but also as pragmatic inferences, as they at the same time depend on what the interlocutors share and accept in a given dialogical circumstance, and affect their dialogical relation. In this introduction, the notion of argumentation scheme will be analyzed in detail, showing its different dimensions and its defining features which make them an extremely useful instrument in Artificial Intelligence. This theoretical background will be followed by a literature review on the uses of the schemes in computing, aimed at identifying the most important areas and trends, the most promising proposals, and the directions of future research.publishersversionpublishe

A Computational Linguistic Analysis of Learners Discourse in Computer-Mediated Group Learning Environments

Communication, collaboration and the social co-construction of knowledge are now considered critical 21st century skills and have taken a principal role in recent theoretical and technological developments in education research. The overall objective of this dissertation was to investigate collaborative learning to gain insight on why some groups are more successful than others. In such discussions, group members naturally assume different roles. These roles emerge through participants’ interactions without any prior instruction or assignment. Different combinations of these roles can produce characteristically different group outcomes, being either less or more productive towards collective goals. However, there has been little research on how to automatically identify these roles and fuse the quality of the process of collaborative interactions with the learning outcome. A major goal of this dissertation is to develop a group communication analysis (GCA) framework, a novel methodology that applies automated computational linguistic techniques to the sequential interactions of online group communication. The GCA involves computing six distinct measures of participant discourse interaction and behavioral patterns and then clustering participants based on their profiles across these measures. The GCA was applied to several large collaborative learning datasets, and identified roles that exhibit distinct patterns in behavioral engagement style (i.e., active or passive, leading or following), contribution characteristics (i.e., providing new information or echoing given material), and social orientation. Through bootstrapping and replication analysis, the roles were found to generalize both within and across different collaborative interaction datasets, indicating that these roles are robust constructs. A multilevel analysis shows that the social roles are predictive of success, both for individual team members and for the overall group. Furthermore, the presence of specific roles within a team produce characteristically different outcomes; leading to specific hypotheses as to optimal group composition. Ideally, the developed analytical tools and findings of this dissertation will contribute to our understanding of how individuals learn together as a group and thereby advance the learning and discourse sciences. More broadly, GCA provides a framework to explore the intra- and inter-personal patterns indicative of the participants’ roles and the sociocognitive processes related to successful collaboration

Integrating knowledge tracing and item response theory: A tale of two frameworks

Traditionally, the assessment and learning science commu-nities rely on different paradigms to model student performance. The assessment community uses Item Response Theory which allows modeling different student abilities and problem difficulties, while the learning science community uses Knowledge Tracing, which captures skill acquisition. These two paradigms are complementary - IRT cannot be used to model student learning, while Knowledge Tracing assumes all students and problems are the same. Recently, two highly related models based on a principled synthesis of IRT and Knowledge Tracing were introduced. However, these two models were evaluated on different data sets, using different evaluation metrics and with different ways of splitting the data into training and testing sets. In this paper we reconcile the models' results by presenting a unified view of the two models, and by evaluating the models under a common evaluation metric. We find that both models are equivalent and only differ in their training procedure. Our results show that the combined IRT and Knowledge Tracing models offer the best of assessment and learning sciences - high prediction accuracy like the IRT model, and the ability to model student learning like Knowledge Tracing

A Semantic Deliberation Model for e-Participation

There have been very few attempts so far to develop a comprehensive and rigorous conceptualization for deliberations in e-participation. Without a rigorous and formal conceptualization of deliberation, consistent content descriptions creation, deliberation records sharing and seamless exploration is difficult. In addition, no e-participation deliberation ontology exists to support citizen-led e-participation particularly when considering contributions made on the social media platforms. This work bridges this gap by providing a rich conceptualization and corresponding formal and executable ontology for deliberation in the context of e-participation. The semantic model covers the core concepts of technology-mediated political discussion and explicitly supports the integrated citizen- and government-led model of e-Participation enabled by social media. Results from the use of the ontology in describing e-Participation deliberation information at Local Government projects are also presented

Completions, Coordination, and Alignment in Dialogue

Collaborative completions are among the strongest evidence that dialogue requires coordination even at the sub-sentential level; the study of sentence completions may thus shed light on a number of central issues both at the `macro’ level of dialogue management and at the `micro’ level of the semantic interpretation of utterances. We propose a treatment of collaborative completions in PTT, a theory of interpretation in dialogue that provides some of the necessary ingredients for a formal account of completions at the ‘micro’ level, such a theory of incremental utterance interpretation and an account of grounding. We argue that an account of semantic interpretation in completions can be provided through relatively straightforward generalizations of existing theories of syntax such as Lexical Tree Adjoining Grammar (LTAG) and of semantics such as (Compositional) DRT and SituationSemantics. At the macro level, we provide an intentional account of completions, as well as a preliminary account within Pickering and Garrod’s alignment theory