Five design principles for experiments on the effects of animated pedagogical agents

Journal of Educational Computing Research

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 209-225

  Clark, Richard E ^a   Choi, Sunhee ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744601431     PISSN: 07356331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/7LRM-3BR2-44GW-9QQY     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Alpert, S. R., Singley, M. K., & Fairweather, P. G. (1999). Deploying intelligent tutors on the web: An architecture and an example. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 183-197.
2. Anderson, R. C., Shirey, L. L., Wilson, P. T., & Fielding, L. G. (1984). Interestingness of children's reading material (Report No. 323). Urbana-Champaign, IL: Center for the Study of Reading.
3. André, E., Rist, T., & Müller, J. (1998). Web persona: A life-like presentation agent for the world-wide web. Knowledge-based Systems, 77(11), 25-36.
4. André, E, Rist, T., & Müller, J. (1999). Employing AI methods to control the behavior of animated interface agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 415-448.
5. Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 416-427.
6. Baylor, A. L. (2002a). Agent-based learning environments as a research tool for investigating teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(3), 249-270.
7. Baylor, A. L. (2002b). Expanding preservice teachers' metacognitive awareness of instructional planning through pedagogical agents. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50(2), 5-22.
8. Baylor, A. L., & Ryu, J. (2003). Does the presence of image and animation enhance pedagogical agent persona? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(4), 373-395.
9. Bosseler, A., & Massaro, D. (2003). Development and evaluation of a computer-animated tutor for vocabulary and language learning in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33(6), 653-672.
10. Bull, S., Greer, J., & McCalla, G. (2003). The caring personal agent. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13(1), 21-34.
11. Cassell, J., & Thórisson, K. R. (1999). The power of a nod and a glance: Envelope vs. emotional feedback in animated conversational agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 519-538.
12. Chatterji, M. (April, 2004). Evidence on "what works": An argument for extended-term, mixed-method (ETMM) evaluation designs. Educational Researcher, 33(9), 3-13.
13. Choi, S., & Clark, R. E. (2004). Five suggestions for the design of experiments on the effects of animated pedagogical agents. Symposium paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Convention in San Diego, California.
14. Clark, R. E. (1999). Yin and Yang cognitive motivational processes operating in multimedia learning environments. In J. van Merriënboer (Ed.), Cognition and Multimedia Design. Herleen, Netherlands: Open University Press.
15. Clark, R. E. (2000). Evaluating distance education: Strategies and cautions. The Quarterly Journal of Distance Education, 7(1), 5-18.
16. Clark, R. E. (Ed.). (2001). Learning from media: Arguments, analysis and evidence. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.
17. Clark, R. E. (2003). Research on web-based learning: A half-full glass. In R. Bruning, C. Horn, & L. M. PytlikZillig (Eds.), Web-based learning: What do we know? Where do we go? (pp. 1-22). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.
18. Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (1999). The development of authentic educational technologies, Educational Technology, 37(2), 5-16.
19. Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (April, 2000). A proposal for the collaborative development of authentic performance technology. Performance Improvement, 40(4), 48-53.
20. Cobb, T. (1997). Cognitive efficiency: Toward a revised theory of media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(4), 21-35.
21. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87-114.
22. Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 428-434.
23. Craig, S., Driscoll, D. M., & Gholson, B. (2004). Constructing knowledge from dialog in an intelligent tutoring system: Interactive learning, vicarious learning, and pedagogical agents. Journal of Education Multimedia and Hypermedia, 73(12), 163-183.
24. Dehn, D. M., & van Mulken, S. (2000). The impact of animated interface agents: A review of empirical research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52, 1-22.
25. Erickson, T. (1997). Designing agents as if people mattered. In J. B. Bradshaw (Ed.), Software Agents (pp. 79-96). Menlo Park, CA: MIT Press.
26. Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1997). The role of interest in learning from scientific text and illustrations, on the distinction between emotional interest and cognitive interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 92-102.
27. Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 414-434.
28. Johnson, W. L., Rickel, J. W., & Lester, J. C. (2000). Animated pedagogical agents: Face-to-face interaction in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 47-78.
29. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371.
30. Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2004). Measuring knowledge to optimize cognitive load factors during instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 558-568.
31. Koda, T., & Maes, P. (1996). Agents with faces: The effect of personification. Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication, Tsukuba, Japan, 189-194.
32. Langer, E. (1994). The illusion of calculated decisions. In R. C. Schank & E. Langer (Eds.), Beliefs, reasoning, and decision making: Psycho-logic in honor of Bob Abelson. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Lester, J., Converse, S., Stone, B., Kahler, S., & Barlow, T. (1997). Animated pedagogical agents and problem solving effectiveness: A large scale empirical evaluation. Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Kobe, Japan, 23-30.
34. Lester, J. C., Towns, S. G., & Fitzgerald, P. J. (1999). Achieving affective impact: Visual emotive communication in lifelike pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 278-291.
35. Levie, W. H., & Dickie, K. E. (1973). The analysis and application of media. In R. M. W. Travers (Ed.), Second handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally.
36. Levin, H. M. (1988). Accelerated schools for at-risk students. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Policy Research in Education.
37. Levin, H. M., Glass, G., & Meister, G. R. (1987). Cost-effectiveness of computer assisted instruction. Evaluation Review, 11(1), 50-72.
38. Levin, H. M., & McEwan, P. J. (2001). Cost-effectiveness analysis: Methods and applications (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Mayer, R. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
40. Mayer, R. E., Dow, G. T., & Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 806-813.
41. Mitrovic, A., & Suraweera, P. (2000). Evaluating an animated pedagogical agent. Lecture notes in computer science, No. 1839, 73-82.
42. Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177-213.
43. Moundridou, M., & Virvou, M. (2002). Evaluating the persona effect of an interface agent in a tutoring system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), 253-261.
44. Nass, C., & Steuer, J. (1993). Anthropomorphism, agency, and ethopoeia: Computers as social actors. Human Communication Research, 19(4), 504-527.
45. Ogata, H., Liu, Y., Ochi, Y., & Yano, Y. (2001). Neclle: Network-based communicative language-learning environment focusing on communicative gaps. Computers & Education, 37, 225-240.
46. Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem solving skills in statistics: A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 428-434.
47. Paas, F. G. W. C., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 419-430.
48. Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
49. Person, N. K., Graesser, A. C., Kreuz, R. J., & Pomeroy, V. (2001). Simulating human tutor dialog moves in auto tutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 23-29.
50. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research and practice (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
51. Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (1989). In search of a happy medium in instructional technology research: Issues concerning external validity, media replications, and learner control. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(1), 19-33.
52. Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (1996). Experiment research methods. In D. J. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 1148-1170). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
53. Ryokai, R., Vaucelle, C., & Cassell, J. (2003). Virtual peers as partners in storytelling and literacy learning. Journal of computer assisted learning, 19, 195-208.
54. Sampson, D., Karagiannidis, C., & Kinshuk, C. (2002). Personalised learning: Educational, technological and standardisation perspective. Interactive Education Multimedia, 4, 24-39.
55. Shirey, L. L., & Reynolds, R. E. (1988). Effect of interest on attention and learning. Journal of Education Psychology, 80(2), 159-166.
56. Song, K., Hu, X., Olney, A., & Graesser, A. C. (2004). A framework of synthesizing tutoring conversation capability with web-based distance education courseware. Computers & Education, 42, 375-388.
57. Sproull, L., Subramani, M., Kiesler, S., Walker, J. H., & Waters, K. (1996). When the interface is a face. Human-Computer Interaction, 11, 97-124.
58. Takeuchi, A., & Naito, T. (1995). Situated facial displays: Towards social interaction. In I. Katz, R. Mack, L. Marks, M. B. Rosson, & J. Nielsen (Eds.), Human factors in computing systems: CHI'95 Conference Proceedings (pp. 450-455). New York: ACM Press.
59. van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1997). Training complex cognitive skills: A four-component instructional design model for technical training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
60. van Mulken, S., André, E., & Müller, J. (1998). The persona effect: How substantial is it? In H. Johnson, L. Nigay, & C. Roast (Eds.), People and computers XIII: Proceedings of HCI'98 (pp. 53-66). Berlin: Springer.