Gaze feedback and PCA suggestions interact on proportional learning gains, with synergy favoring the visible-gaze/visible-agent condition¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 A significant gaze × PCA interaction on gain score (η2p = 0.078). → Hayashi 2020 q3 i3 Simple effect: visible gaze higher than no gaze when there was no PCA (η2p = 0.152). → Hayashi 2020 (2) q3 i3 Simple effect: visible agent higher than no agent when learners did not receive visible gaze feedback (η2p = 0.308). → Hayashi 2020 (3)

Evidence¶

Hayashi 2020¶

Hayashi, Y. (2020). Gaze awareness and metacognitive suggestions by a pedagogical conversational agent: an experimental investigation on interventions to support collaborative learning process and performance. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09333-3

q3 · i2 · causal · r?

A 2×2 between-subject ANOVA on proportional gain scores from pre/post free-recall tests of self, partner, and integrated concepts found "F (1,76) = 6.460, p = 0.013", η2p = 0.078.

"There was a significant interaction between the two factors (F (1,76) = 6.460, p = 0.013, η2p = 0.078)."

Hayashi 2020 (2)¶

Hayashi, Y. (2020). Gaze awareness and metacognitive suggestions by a pedagogical conversational agent: an experimental investigation on interventions to support collaborative learning process and performance. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09333-3

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Simple main effects on gain scores: visible gaze exceeded no gaze "when there was no PCA", "F (1,76) = 13.627", η2p = 0.152.

"Further analysis conducted for the simple main effects revealed that the score for the visible-gaze condition was higher than that for the no-gaze condition when there was no PCA (F (1,76) = 13.627,p = 0.00, η2p = 0.152)."

Hayashi 2020 (3)¶

Hayashi, Y. (2020). Gaze awareness and metacognitive suggestions by a pedagogical conversational agent: an experimental investigation on interventions to support collaborative learning process and performance. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09333-3

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

The visible-agent condition was higher than the no-agent condition both without gaze (η2p = 0.308) and with gaze (η2p = 0.061), as the article reports the two "respectively"; only test statistics and η2p are printed.

"Moreover, the score for the visible-agent condition was higher than that for the no- agent condition when the learners did not/did receive visible feedback on their partners ’gaze (F (1,76) = 33.880, p =0 . 0 0 0 ,η2p =0 . 3 0 8 ;F (1,76) = 4.956, p = 0.029, η2p = 0.061, respectively)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Gaze feedback and PCA suggestions show no interaction effect on the collaborative process ratings — related
• A successful coordination/high learning-gain correlation appears only for learners receiving both visible gaze feedback and PCA suggestions — related
• Consensus reaching and task division together predict learning gains across conditions — related
• Visible real-time gaze feedback improves collaborative-process coordination, especially information pooling, in dyadic knowledge integration tasks — related
• PCA metacognitive suggestions improve consensus reaching, task division and reciprocal interaction during collaboration — related
• In a 2x2 experiment on jigsaw dyads, the implicit gaze awareness tool affected dialogue processes much more than the explicit pedagogical conversational agent, which compensated when gaze awareness was absent — related