When deictic gestures in a robot can harm child-robot collaboration

This paper describes research aimed at supporting children's reading practices using a robot designed to interact with children as their reading companion. We use a learning by teaching scenario in which the robot has a similar or lower reading level compared to children, and needs help and extra practice to develop its reading skills. The interaction is structured with robot reading to the child and sometimes making mistakes as the robot is considered to be in the learning phase. Child corrects the robot by giving it instant feedbacks. To understand what kind of behavior can be more constructive to the interaction especially in helping the child, we evaluated the effect of a deictic gesture, namely pointing on the child's ability to find reading mistakes made by the robot. We designed three types of mistakes corresponding to different levels of reading mastery. We tested our system in a within-subject experiment with 16 children. We split children into a high and low reading proficiency even-though they were all beginners. For the high reading proficiency group, we observed that pointing gestures were beneficial for recognizing some types of mistakes that the robot made. For the earlier stage group of readers pointing were helping to find mistakes that were raised upon a mismatch between text and illustrations. However, surprisingly, for this same group of children, the deictic gestures were disturbing in recognizing mismatches between text and meaning

Construct validation of the Inventory of Learning Processes

Two correlational investigations are described which are aimed at establishing the construct validity of the dimensions assessed by the scales of the Inventory of Learning Processes. The Synthesis-Analysis scale is assumed to assess "deep" (e.g., semantic) information-processing habits. It was positively related to critical thinking ability, curiosity, and both independent and conforming achievement-striving behaviors but negatively related to anxiety. The Study Methods scale is assumed to assess the habits of promptly completing all assignments, attending all classes, and generally "studying" a lot. It was positively related to curiosity and conforming types of achievement striving and negatively related to critical thinking ability. The fact that critical thinking ability is related positively to Synthesis- Analysis and negatively to Study Methods suggests that students with low critical thinking ability but high achievement motivation might substitute conventional repetitive study for "deep processing" because they find it difficult to engage in "deep processing." The Fact Retention scale is assumed to assess attention to and proneness to retain detailed, factual information. It was positively related to conforming achievement behaviors and negatively related to anxiety. The Elaborative Processing scale is assumed to assess the habit of restating and reorganizing information so as to relate it to one’s own experiences. It was positively related to mental imagery ability and curiosity.Schmeck, Ronald R.; Ribich, Fred. (1978). Construct validation of the Inventory of Learning Processes. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/99453

Academic achievement and individual differences in learning processes

This study was concerned with the degree of relationship between academic achievement, as assessed by college grade-point average, and information-processing habits relevant to learning, as assessed by the scales of the Inventory of Learning Processes (ILP). The ILP scales of Synthesis-Analysis, Fact Retention, and Elaborative Processing were significantly related to GPA and scores on the American College Testing (ACT) Program Assessment. Thus, the successful student seems to process information in depth and encode it elaboratively, while simultaneously retaining the details of the original information. Unexpectedly, the Study Methods scale demonstrated a small but significant negative relationship with ACT scores. A path analysis suggested that the effects which Fact Retention and Elaborative Processing have upon GPA are mainly direct, while the effect of Synthesis-Analysis is mostly interpreted by ACT.Schmeck, Ronald R.; Echternacht, Gary J.. (1979). Academic achievement and individual differences in learning processes. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/99537

Development of a self-report inventory for assessing individual differences in learning processes

Five studies are presented-all related to the development and application of a self-report inventory for measuring individual differences in learning processes. Factor analysis of items derived by translating laboratory learning processes into the context of academic study yielded four scales: Synthesis-Analysis, Study Methods, Fact Retention, and Elaborative Processing. There were no sex differences, and the scales demonstrated acceptable reliabilities. The Synthesis-Analysis and Elaborative Processing scales both assess aspects of information processing (including depth of processing), but Synthesis-Analysis assesses organizational processes, while Elaborative Processing deals with active, elaborative approaches to encoding. These two scales were positively related to performance under incidental learning instructions in both a lecture-learning and traditional verbal-learning study. Study Methods assessed adherence to systematic, traditional study techniques. This scale was positively related to performance in the intentional condition of the verbal learning study. The Fact Retention scale assessed the propensity to retain detailed, factual information. It was positively related to performance in the incidental condition of the verbal-learning but not the lecture-learning study. Future research and applications are discussed

A psychometric investigation of the Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes

The present study investigated the reliability of the previously hypothesized four-factor model of the Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (SSHA; Brown & Holtzman, 1953, 1967). The reliabilities of the scales were marginal as measured by coefficient alpha. The hierarchical model of the SSHA was not supported by confirmatory factor analysis. Numerous test items were found to load highest on a factor other than the one hypothesized by the Brown-Holtzman model. In addition, many items exhibited very low communalities and failed to load highly on any factor.Bray, James H.; Maxwell, Scott E.; Schmeck, Ronald R.. (1980). A psychometric investigation of the Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/100076