In the emotional stability experiment, emotional support use and slant depend on score, trait level, and their interaction¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr?·q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? Score had a significant effect on the use of Advice, Reassurance, Praise and Emotional Reflection in the emotional stability experiment. → Matt Dennis 2016
q3 i? Trait level (emotional stability) had significant effects on slant and on Emotional Reflection, and trait-level x score interactions were significant for Advice, Emotional Reflection and total emotional support statements. → Matt Dennis 2016 (2)
Evidence¶
Matt Dennis 2016¶
Matt Dennis, Judith Masthoff, Chris Mellish. (2016). Adapting Progress Feedback and Emotional Support to Learner Personality. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0059-7
q3 · i? · causal · r?
Crowdsourced 6x2 between-subjects experiment on learner emotional stability; the 2-way MANOVA showed "a significant effect of score on the use of Advice, Reassurance, Praise and Emotional Reflection". No effect sizes are printed.
"H1 is confirmed, as there is a significant effect of score on the use of Advice, Reassurance, Praise and Emotional Reflection."
Matt Dennis 2016 (2)¶
Matt Dennis, Judith Masthoff, Chris Mellish. (2016). Adapting Progress Feedback and Emotional Support to Learner Personality. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0059-7
q3 · i? · causal · r?
From the 2-way MANOVA table for the emotional stability experiment: "ER F( 5, 228) = 3.57, p<. 01 F( 1, 228) = 6.21, p<. 02 F( 5, 228) = 2.27, p<. 05", i.e. significant score, trait-level, and trait-level x score effects on Emotional Reflection use.
"ER F( 5, 228) = 3.57, p<. 01 F( 1, 228) = 6.21, p<. 02 F( 5, 228) = 2.27, p<. 05"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Personality Traits — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
Related Claims¶
- Conscientiousness interacts with score in the use of advice: advice is given at 70% for low-conscientiousness learners but not for high-conscientiousness learners — related
- The type of emotional support and slant given to a learner depends on the score the learner achieved (Experiment 1: conscientiousness) — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
emotional-stability-affects-support-and-slant |
title |
In the emotional stability experiment, emotional support use and slant depend on score, trait level, and their interaction |
description |
In the emotional stability experiment, emotional support use and slant depend on score, trait level, and their interaction |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2016 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — matt-dennis-2016, matt-dennis-2016-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.